How Much Money Do The Top Income Earners Make?

Ever wonder how much money do the top income earners make? Once you know how much the top income earners make, then you can better shoot to be a top income earner yourself. After all, everything is relative when it comes to money.

Americans are rich by world standards. With a median household income of roughly $76,000, America consistently ranks in the Top 20 richest countries in the world. Many of the world's top income earners live right here in our great country. Just being born into a rich country makes us very lucky.

Other rich countries that have a higher GDP per capita than America include Liechtenstein ($139K), Qatar, Monaco, Macau, Luxembourg, Bermuda, Singapore, Isle of Man, Brunei, Ireland, Norway, Falkland Islands, UAB, S. Maarten, Kuwait, and Gibraltar. Countries with similar GDP per capita to America include Hong Kong, Switzerland, and Saudi Arabia.

If at birth, you had the mental capacity to choose where you'd like to live for most of your life, living in a top 20 richest country will more than likely help you become a top income earner as well.

Even if you end up being the most mediocre producer, you are still miles ahead of much of the world. Too bad many of us can't pick where we want to grow up and earn a living. As such, it's nice to understand how we compare against the rest of the world to give us some perspective.

Let's take a look at what the top income earners make in America. Once you know the income figures, you can then strategize on how to get there.

What The Top 1%, 5%, 10%, 25%, and 50% Income Earners Make

Based on the Internal Revenue Service's database, here's how much the top Americans make for 2023. These are estimates due to rising inflation. Since the previous financial crisis in 2008 – 2009, the top 10% have significantly widened the wealth gap.

  • Top 1%: $650,000+
  • Top 5%: $250,000+
  • Top 10%: $170,000+
  • Top 25%: $95,000
  • Top 50%: >$50,000

The rich have gotten much richer during the pandemic. Therefore, the top income earners are making even more than ever before. Sadly, the wealth gap has widened as we continue through a K-shaped recovery.

Summary Of Top Income Earners Tax Data

Here is data from the IRS that highlights what the top income earners made back in 2015. A top income earner is considered someone who makes a top 10%, top 5%, and top 1% income. Notice how much the top income earners are making today, partially thanks to inflation.

There is not a lot of data about the mega-rich, those in the top 0.1%. However, I also write a huge post highlighting people who make over $1 million a year and how.

Chart Of The Top Income Earners And Tax Contribution - How Much Money Do The Top Income Earners Make?

Based on a previous 1000+ survey study on Financial Samurai, about 80% of readers are in the Top 25% income earners ($95,000+). Good to know that many of you are doing well.

The table also tells us a number of things about equality or inequality, namely that the top 1% of tax payers pay 38% of all income taxes yet only have a 20% share of total AGI.

Further, the top 50% of tax payers pay practically all of the nation's federal taxes (97.3%) while commanding 87.25% of total AGI. This table from the IRS is the source for the often politically bantered argument that 47% of American income earners pay zero federal income taxes.

If you do another little exercise and compare the top 25% of American income to the Top 10 per capita income countries in the world, you can once again see how lucky most of us are.

Once you earn a top income, you need to save and invest aggressive to achieve a top one percent net worth. After all, it's often not what you make but what you keep.

Broaden Tax Collection Beyond Just The Top Income Earners

If only we could get all American wage earns to pay some taxes. It would go a long way to help shoring up our budget. Congress constantly holds the nation hostage by bickering over whether to cut $10 billion here, $50 billion there. All we have to do is encourage those who earn above the poverty line to pay some tax. We'd raise billions a year right there for example!

Let's have everyone contribute to the welfare of our country. We are all in this together! For those who are just struggling to keep their heads above water, let's lend them a helping hand.

The top 1% income earner in 2023 is now earning at least $650,000 a year. But in some states, like Connecticut, the top income earners make over $800,000 a year.

Who Are The Majority Who Pay No Federal Income Taxes?

Back around 2015, roughly 47% of Americans pay no income taxes. In 2023, roughly 60% of working Americans didn't pay any federal income taxes, largely due to the pandemic. As the pandemic becomes endemic, the likelihood is that more Americans go back to work, make more money, and pay more taxes.

The Americans who pay no income taxes fall into three groups:

The working poor. The earned income tax credit and the child credit can help families making $50,000 or more pay no taxes or get money back. About 60% of those not paying income taxes do contribute to payroll taxes. Meaning they must have some source of earned income.

The elderly. An increased standard deduction for those over 65, and an exemption on part of Social Security earnings, means that many older Americans pay no income taxes. Please remember though that the elderly have paid their dues through decades worth of federal taxation during their careers.

The low-income. A family of four claiming only the standard deduction and personal exemptions pays no federal income tax on its first $27,700 of income. The standard deduction per person is now $13,850 in 2023. Further, each family gets a $500 child tax credit.

Not Everybody Has The Ability To Make A Top Income

As you can see, being poor or elderly likely means you don't pay net federal income taxes. We're all going to grow old one day, so let's give this group a pass. The elderly paid into the system, so let's take care of them. I don't think any of us would rather be poor so we can pay no federal taxes. Therefore, let's give them a pass too.

This leaves us with a low-income group that may have made some suboptimal decisions. Some of these decisions include having children while not being able to support themselves. Children are estimated to cost roughly $250,000 from the ages of 1-18. Perhaps having multiple children on a low income is not ideal. But, how do you deny passion?

Top one percent income levels - How Much Money Do The Top Income Earners Make?

Living In America Is Rich

If you work in America, you can see from a top down and bottoms up perspective you're doing fantastic. If you are in the bottom 50% of Americans who earn less than $33,048 a year, know that you can earn more if you want to.

Part of battle to making more money is moving to areas where there are more opportunity. Earning a top one percent income for your age is a numbers game that also requires a lot of luck.

Billions of dollars are flowing through cities like San Francisco due to technology innovation. It's not like you have to brave the high seas to reach America to get rich. It's not like you need to ride a horse for three months to get from New York to California. All you've got to do is hop on a bus or a plane to be where the action is.

25 years ago, I remember making $550 a month working at McDonald's for $3.75/hour. With wages 3X higher now, I'd be pulling in $1,650 a month or $20,000 a year! Heck, tack on driving for Uber for 20 hours a week part-time at $36/hour. You'll make another $2,000 a month and be in the top 50% of income earners no problem.

There's an entire gig economy out there for freelancers to make extra money after work, or freelance full time. Why not take advantage to become a top income earner yourself?

Top Income Earners Still Experience Stress And Anxiety

Despite earning a top income for your age group, you might still feel anxiety, especially if you have children. The reason why is that your income is dependent on effort. The minute you stop working, your income drops, hence the importance of generating passive income.

Another reason for general angst and anxiety, despite earning a top income, is the fear of downward mobility for your children. Given your income is so high, chances are also high your children won't make a similar level of income.

As a result, your goal may be to strive for generational wealth to help your children maintain the same lifestyle in adulthood. However, to accumulate generational wealth, often defined as at least $5 million to pass down to your children, will require an enormous amount of effort.

Please Put In The Work To Grow Your Income And Wealth

If you are only working 40 hours a week or less and complaining why you can't get ahead, you need to seriously re-evaluate your work ethic and expectations. Anybody can do it. You just can't be delusional enough to think that you'll be able to compete when everybody in the world who wants to get ahead is working 60+ hours a week and getting paid much less to boot!

Spend some time online understanding global wages from our biggest competitors in China and India. In order to maintain our incomes, we must constantly be updating our skills.

There are plenty of six figure jobs out there for the taking. You just need to have the desire, motivation, work ethic, and perseverance to get there. Did you know the San Francisco police chief makes $320,000 a year? Further, when he retires, he'll get a $200,000 a year pension for life! It's not just doctors, lawyers, venture capitalists, bankers, movie stars and athletes who make healthy sums of money.

A Variety Of Jobs Pay Well

Even my friend who is a union electrician makes $120,000 a year. He also gets a $5,000 a month pension when he retires at 55. What's more, he isn't allowed to work more than 35 hours a week. Let's not count the $30,000 a year he makes doing side jobs with all that free time. There are six figure earners in practically every single industry, including the non-profit industry!

Back to my point where if everybody earns a million dollars a year, nobody is rich. Living in San Francisco, it certainly feels like most are in the top 5% of income earners ($159,619). Train janitors and elevator technicians in the Bay Area can make over $250,000 a year with overtime.

I'm sure many who live and work in Manhattan, and potentially LA and Chicago feel the same way. The cost of living is expensive out here, and that's predominantly driven by high wages.

Combine two income earners with these amounts, and you can really start understanding why surpassing what the government deems as wealthy ($250,000) is not too difficult. Thankfully in 2022+, President Biden only wants to raise taxes on households making over $400,000 a year.

In fact, I argue that in many of the larger cities in America, you've got to earn closer to $300,000 a year just to live a middle class lifestyle. It sounds crazy. But it's true if you take a careful look at the budget I put together. A middle-class lifestyle means owning a home, being able to raise two kids, and save for retirement.

The Top Income Earners Pay The Most Taxes

The top 1% of income earners will likely continue to pay a higher percentage share of overall income taxes than their share of income justifies. If things were fair, the top 1% would only have to pay 20% of total income taxes since 20% is their share of total income. Alas, the rich pay almost double what they owe.

Therefore, it's not worth constantly demonizing the rich for “not paying their fair share.” The rich donate the most and employ the most people.

On the flip side, the bottom 50% who earn 12.75% of total earnings only pay 2.7% in total taxes. But, as we learned above, most of the bottom 50% are elderly or poor. Nobody is asking the bottom 50% to pay more taxes.

It's impossible to create a fair tax system that everybody will agree on. But we can look at the data to understand who is making the most and least income. We can see who is paying the most and least in taxes.

It's great to be a top income earner. However, it's even greater to be happy. Find your balance!

Here are three things top income earners do below.

Top Income Earners Invest In Real Estate

Real estate is one of the favorite asset classes to build wealth by top income earners. Real estate is tangible, provides utility, and generates valuable income. With mortgage rates staying at record-lows and more people working from home, the growth of real estate will likely be strong for years to come.

Top income earners invest in rental properties for cash flow and capital appreciation. Top income earners tend to also be extremely busy. Therefore, they like to invest in real estate crowdfunding and private real estate to earn 100% passively.

Best Private Real Estate Investing Platforms

Fundrise: A way for all investors to diversify into real estate through private funds with just $10. Fundrise has been around since 2012 and manages over $3.3 billion for 400,000+ investors. 

The real estate platform invests primarily in residential and industrial properties in the Sunbelt, where valuations are cheaper and yields are higher. The spreading out of America is a long-term demographic trend. For most people, investing in a diversified fund is the way to go. 

CrowdStreet: A way for accredited investors to invest in individual real estate opportunities mostly in 18-hour cities. 18-hour cities are secondary cities with lower valuations and higher rental yields. These cities also have higher growth potential due to job growth and demographic trends. 

If you are a real estate enthusiast with more time, you can build your own diversified real estate portfolio with CrowdStreet. However, before investing in each deal, make sure to do extensive due diligence on each sponsor. Understanding each sponsor's track record and experience is vital.

Fundrise

I've invested $954,000 in real estate crowdfunding so far. My goal is to diversify my expensive SF real estate holdings and earn more 100% passive income. I plan to continue dollar-cost investing into private real estate for the next decade.

Top Income Earners Own Businesses

We are in the technology and internet age now. If you really want unlimited earnings potential, you might as well be your own boss someday. It costs so little now to just start your own website so you can brand yourself online.

You will connect with like-minded people, find new jobs and consulting opportunities, and potentially make a healthy living online. Take a look at this income statement example of a friend with a simple personal finance blog.

How much can you make blogging for a living
The are many ways to make money online if you have a brand and the traffic

I started Financial Samurai in 2009 as a hobby to help make sense of the financial destruction back then. Today, Financial Samurai is one of my most valuable assets.

You can start your WordPress site like this one with Bluehost for as little as $2.95 a month. Come up with a unique and memorable domain name. Find a free website theme. Then connect your hosting and you'll be up and running in 30 minutes.

The best thing you can do while you have a job is work on your side hustle during off hours. You never know what might happen if you just start.

Top Income Earners Invest In Private Growth Businesses

The greater the net worth, the greater the percentage of the net worth is in business interests. Companies are staying private for longer, as a result, more gains are accruing to private company investors. Finding the next Google or Apple before going public can be a life-changing investment. 

If you don't want to start a business, invest in private businesses. Check out the Innovation Fund, which invests in the following five sectors:

  • Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning
  • Modern Data Infrastructure
  • Development Operations (DevOps)
  • Financial Technology (FinTech)
  • Real Estate & Property Technology (PropTech)

Roughly 35% of the Innovation Fund is invested in artificial intelligence, which I'm extremely bullish about. In 20 years, I don't want my kids wondering why I didn't invest in AI or work in AI!

The investment minimum is also only $10 while most venture capital funds have a $250,000+ minimum. You can see what the Innovation Fund is holding before deciding to invest and how much. 

Net worth composition by levels of wealth

Top Income Earners Track Their Net Worth

Finally, top income earners religiously track their net worths. You can only truly optimize your wealth if you know where all your money is going. Sign up for Empower, the web's #1 free wealth management tool to get a better handle on your finances.

I've been using them since 2012 and have made much wiser financial decisions since. In addition to better money oversight, run your investments through their award-winning Investment Checkup tool. The tool will show you exactly how much you are paying in fees. Further, it will give you insights into your asset allocation. I was paying $1,700 a year in fees I had no idea I was paying.

After you link all your accounts, use the Empower Retirement Planning calculator. It pulls your real data to give you as pure an estimation of your financial future as possible. Your financial future is too important not to take it seriously. You don't want to end up old and not have enough money because there is no rewind button!

Retirement Planner Personal Capital
Is your retirement on track? Check for free after linking your accounts

Join 65,000+ others and subscribe to my free weekly newsletter. Since 2009, the newsletter has helped people achieve financial freedom sooner, rather than later. If you want to be one of the top income earners, you need as much actionable advice as possible.

To be a top income earner, you've really got to want it! And to help you get there, pick up a hard copy of my new book, Buy This, Not That: How To Spend Your Way To Wealth And Freedom. The book is your unfair advantage for getting rich and making optimal decisions.

1,343 thoughts on “How Much Money Do The Top Income Earners Make?”

  1. Thank you Sam for taking the time to write this article. I came across your blog and it is great! The stats for the top financial earners are very detailed and informative. I know now that to be a top earner you need a higher education to get to know all the ins and outs. Very interesting thank you.

  2. Often overlooked is your age demographic relative to your salary. Someone who makes $80K as a 30-year-old could easily be someone who makes $350 – $500K as a 50 yr old.

  3. Greetings,
    Current Population Survey and Census Data provide a better picture of total household income than AGI, which doesn’t include tax-free income, excludes at least 15% of SS income (for many people that will be 50%), and allows certain income adjustments.
    1% – $570K
    5% – $286K
    10% – $212K
    20% – $150K
    According to this source average household income in 2022 was $102,310 and median $71,181.

  4. Dayton Ohioan

    The rich pay the most in taxes. Most of the taxes the rich are paying is from payroll deductions and matching. The more an hourly worker makes. The more effort we put in gets taxes even higher making those efforts worth less. Then you go home to unhappy people because you’re not there during family moments. Eventually breaks down. What breaks the camel’s backs? Tax codes are to blame for many things. Which ones are being me in this this writing. Best wishes

  5. It’s easy to forget, but there really are opportunities abound for those who want to make more money.

    In my industry alone (security), the standard seems to be six figures. If you’re willing to move to some of these high cost of living areas, that figure can jump quite a bit.

    At what point do you think it’s worth it to live in these high cost of living areas when compared to the more average American city? The raises, while enticing, don’t seem to make up for it. At that point is it just preference?

  6. Thanks Sam. This blog is amazing.
    I have a question: do all the top 10% income earners pay most of the tax amount they actually earn?

    These are great résumé examples were getting jobs. I’m thinking about getting a new job in 2021 as the economy opens up.

  7. Supporting the idea that working over 40 hours a week is a good way to live life is at the least misguided and at the worst wrongheaded.
    Please take time to review what happened to the majority of those who have choose to work 40 plus hours. Many of them have shortened life expectancy, more chronic illness not even to mention their relationship outside of work are quit poor. This holds in other countries as well. Modern work environment is not a healthy place to spend huge swaths of our time.

    1. Liz, you work for what you want. Although this is 2020, and we should expect some comments about health and wellbeing, it’s also 2020; a time when opportunities to hustle have never been greater.

      I’m working three jobs. Not because I have to, because I want to improve myself and the life of those around me.

      I’ll be extremely likely to retire early as a result.

  8. some Rich people are greedy

    This is why I think it’s unfair. And the rich don’t pay enough, My easy way to look at it. All math. Use a roll of toilet paper. Each square is $25,000 in income. after 9 squares the 1st 6 brackets are covered. Yes that covers all the way to $204,102 and these people pay 35% in taxes, So they pay 71,435 in taxes and keep $132,666. go 13 more squares and the finial 7th bracket is covered $510,301 and they pay 37% taxes they pay $188,811 and they get to keep $321,489. so this is when taxes are not fair. But lets go on because if that is screwed up. Then check this out. we have just reached the 22 sheet. these rolls has 350 sheets in 2017 Bill gates made over 4 billion. You make sure you taxed the poor 10% and the middle class 22% so what about bill gates will lets look. it will take 114 more rolls to hit his income he made. But he only paid 37% on 4,000,000,000 and the disabled vet paid 10% on that $1,000 over the $24,000. then you have the nerve to say you need to work harder. how many people get rich stealing from others. How many ran a scam to get rich quick. you rich always want to raise our taxes. and lower yours. I don’t care what you pay but it should be like in the 1970’s at 80% you know Bill Gates would still make $80,000,000 after taxes. how much does a person need. Just enough to buy the congress right.

    1. Mark Fuckerburg Zucks

      You did not look at the figures. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have that rediculous example. Half of tax filers don’t pay federal taxes yet they benefit. The ultra rich will always have avenues to mitigate liability, but they still pay a large share. Errbody needs to pay A share.

    2. regardless of whether I agree or disagree that rich people pay too much or too little, I am disappointed in the question “how many people get rich stealing from others”. Perhaps we differ on the definition of stealing, but I just don’t see it that way.

      But even still, just because someone might have done something wrong, you argue we should punish everyone similar to them. By that logic, we should cut all medicare, medicaid, social security, and other social services because “how many people steal from these programs” Your logic is divisive and flawed.

      I think the fundamental question is what is equal, proportionate, or equitable, and what goal are you trying to achieve? Is it a balanced budget, fairness, encouraging income or wealth, etc. And rather than calling out extreme examples (i.e. Bill Gates or the vet) look to people in the middle of each bracket and what each policy would mean for them. With such varying costs of living, many people in these brackets, would struggle with increased burden. At the same time, many would face economic challenges if we cut back on spending. I think many people believe there can be more brackets, and higher taxes as we go up, but we also have to balance that with the reality that taxing the top fractions of a percent of earners won’t solve the budget challenges. While it may make people feel better, and could be argued as more equitable, it is certainly less equal and proportionate.

      1. Dayton Ohioan

        How about additional property tax adjusted for national defense spending. Leveraging the homestead act as a way to opt out for disabled and elderly under certain incomes.

  9. Bookscrounger

    The top 1% don’t make $360K.

    That is the split point, i.e., the minimum for that tax bracket.

    1. ivandeploravich

      Because it is not readily provided by the press, the Progs always imply that you need to make millions to be in the Top 1%.
      And economics is not taught in schools anymore.
      They are teaching islam instead.

      1. Can you please share one example of a public school in the U.S. “teaching Islam”? I mean, outside of a Comparative Religion class, which would usually be at the college level.

    2. Mark Fuckerburg

      Correct, that’s the minimum amount to be considered a 1% for that year. Even among the 1% there is a big divide of the working class doctor and. millionaire business owner.

      1. You had me until your racist comment about Islam. It’s the largest religion in the world and does teach fiscal responsibility. Don’t judge the 1.8 billion Muslims in the world by a fraction of a percent of violent extremists and corrupt oligarchs who corrupt the religion. Otherwise it would be sound to judge all Republicans In the US by neo Nazi and militia violence, the majority of domestic terrorism in the US in recent years being perpetrated by white males preaching conservative allegiance.

  10. FS,

    Great article.

    The IRS data is (for certain) very accurate but I wonder if it paints a picture that there are *less* well-off people than there actually are. If so, your point is proven even further.

    Here is why I think the incomes reported to the IRS are lower than we realize:
    * Small business owners are notorious for avoiding taxes by making everything a business expense
    * Many high-paid freelancers such as hairstylists, makeup artists, photographers, painters, roofers, etc prefer to be paid in cash and also receive cash tips. This doesn’t apply to all their contracts, but they may receive a share of their income in cash.
    * The “landed” well-off tend to derive their income from their assets. They only pay taxes when they realize gains on these assets, whether it is stocks/business income/real estate…

    Almost all of these high earners come from the self-employed and entrepreneurial corner.

    Anecdotally, there is a large number of expensive houses in US cities. Far more of these “wealthy” houses than there are high income earners if you go by the IRS definition.

    What do you think? Is the income data skewed downward?

    1. Jessica Bixler

      Actially adjust gross income is a bad way to tell. The main complaint is the wealthy have so manyloopholes available to them to get out of paying taxes. Those loopholes and breaks get applied BEFORE agi is calculated. It seems alll the info on gross income of the 1% has been censored but the last data I saw was in 08′ the 1% make 80% of the income before deductions. By 2018 they had 90% of the total income before deductions. So if that 90% gets adjusted down 80% I would say thete is an issue. Comapre that to the average earner at 63,000 who gets adjusted down to 38,000.

  11. It’s crazy how poorly the top income earners are treated in our country. They are the job creators and the biggest tax payers in the entire nation. I believe there will always be resentment from the middle class toward the rich.

    This resentment is exactly what makes it hard for the rich to want to have a healthy dialogue with the middle class. It’s definitely an issue to keep an eye on as wealth/income inequality continues to grow.

    1. It’s demand that creates jobs. People can become rich by meeting that demand, but people that are already rich are better situated to more quickly exploit the opportunities.

      And, while the top income earners may pay the majority of taxes (debatable for many of the richest), the one percenters pay proportionately less. If you and your wife earn 200k in wages, and pay 30k to the IRS, is it fair to see a couple next door, that is making 600k per year, and paying 60k to the IRS? Yes, they are bigger tax payers if you go by dollars, but is that really the way to measure it?

      And, of course, you probably won’t see it because it considered socially unacceptable (and possibly even a bit dangerous) to discuss personal wages and income in this country. And, even if you knew how much they were taking in, through wages and investments, and you are emphatically not allowed to see their tax returns. The only reason these numbers ever emerge on this forum is because most of us, including Sam, are anonymous.

  12. I get tired of hearing that the wealthy don’t pay their fair share. I ask my left leaning friends what is a “fair” income tax rate. Almost none of them have an answer or if they do it is less than the effective tax rate that my wife and I pay(44.1% last year on our gross income). My tax rate if I would have stayed in California this year would have been 37% federal and 13.3% state. My wife is an executive at a fortune 100 company so all of my income is taxed at the highest marginal rate. If you add social security(on most of my income) and Medicare taxes, my effective income tax rate would be about 59%. Is it right or “fair” that I have to work for the government for 7 months every year before I get to keep any of my income?

    We made the decision for me to retire this year and move to another state with lower taxes. It was no longer worth my time to go to work when most of my labor was going to pay the government. We no longer employ a gardener, pool service, or nanny which amounts to about $1900 per month in savings. Along with the income tax saving and lower property taxes, our take-home pay is nearly identical to when I was working(My salary and bonus put me in the top 5% of income earners) Many on the left don’t realize that as you increase the marginal income tax rates people will work less or like me, stop working altogether. I’m guessing now that the SALT deduction is capped at $10,000, the high tax states will find out that a lot of their citizens will be moving out of state like we did to escape the exorbitant taxes.

    The other fact that gets overlooked is very income level are fluid throughout someones life and very, very few stay in the top 1% for very many years. 73% of Americans get to the top 20% of income for at least 1 year of their lives. Only 0.6% will stay in the top 1% for 10 consecutive years. Many view the 1% ers as a group that is born that way and stays there their entire lives and that is the exception rather than the rule.

    1. except you still are working. Your wife is essentially paying you to do all the work she was paying the gardener, the nanny, the pool guy, etc

    2. I’m with you, Tahoebum. I could support the liberals “rich don’t pay their fair share” argument if they put an actual percentage to what constitutes “fair share”. But of course they never will, because if that tax rate was implemented, how would they get more money in the future and who would be their “villian” when the country wasn’t doing well economically? I find it humorous that they bemoan that the wealthy aren’t paying enough, while at the same time trying to get the SALT deduction increased (cap removed) Who do they think pays more than $10k a year in state and local taxes, the school teachers? No, it’s the wealthy. Simple way to make everyone pay there “fair share”—FLAT TAX, NO DEDUCTIONS. The politicians could have as many brackets as they want and start the tax at any level. For instance, first $30k is tax free, next $20k is taxed at 5%, next $50k at 10%, etc. up to some top, borderline confiscatory rate (e.g.70%), at whatever level the politicians deem “ultra-wealthy” ($5M+). The key is to remove all deductions/special treatment, which would remove all loopholes. No SALT deduction, no mortgage interest (most of that benefit goes to the upper middle class and above anyway),no special dividend rate, no oil and gas drilling credit, etc. Of course, deductions that supposedly “help” the poor—EIC, std deduction, over-65, etc. would vanish as well. Solution—Set the tax -free amount and lower income brackets accordingly. The added bonus is that filling out your taxes in April would be simple. Of course, this scenario is as unlikely as Trump and Pelosi being BFFs, because despite their comments, politicians (both the liberals and conservatives) actually want a complex tax code, so they can give financial benefits to their preferred constituents.
      My wife and I were both making 6-figures. When she started getting close to 7-figures, I looked at how much of my pay was going to the gov’t and what expenses would be lower if I retired, and decided I would prefer to be retired. It will be 10 years in June and I’m loving it. Even better, when she retires next year and we have no more W-2 income, we will be able to “game” the system by picking and choosing which assets we sell to generate income. We’ll have a 8-figure net worth and have over $500k/yr to spend, but thanks to the tax code we won’t be considered “wealthy” –courtesy of the short-sighted, unwilling to work with the other party, politicians on both sides of the aisle. God bless America!

    3. The big problem isn’t that people who work for a living aren’t being taxed enough. It’s that rent-seeking isn’t taxed enough, and if anything, labor is taxed too much.

      Labor is taxed at extreme rates. Capital is taxed at a much lower rate. Land is taxed at an almost negligible rate.

      This is entirely backwards from how it should be. If you tax labor, you get less labor. If you tax capital, you get less capital. If you tax land, well, you get the same amount of land.

      We should have a nationwide land value tax of probably 5% or so, capital taxes roughly where they are but taxing stock buybacks at the same rate as the top bracket of capital gains, and significantly reduce taxes on labor. Then we’d have fairly well-aligned incentives with minimal distortions.

    4. Most of the actual arguments for increasing taxes on the rich are about closing loopholes — making those 10-100 times richer than you pay their fair share. Consider the carried interest loophole and various forms of off-shoring. The “little millionaires” get stepped up basis upon death of real-estate and tax deductions for business expenses that may actually be consumption; these ought to be closed too, but gotta spread things around a bit to keep a critical mass of support.

      The really cool trick is how the uber rich trick the moderately wealthy into thinking the libs are coming after them. The real unfairness in taxes is in the 0.1%, and especially the top 0.01%.

  13. Whilst I agree with everything you’ve written some people don’t want to make more money, although they do want to complain about not earning enough! There are two types of people in this world – the talkers and the doers. It’s the doers who make shit happen – most people reading this are doers -> go and get everything you deserve!

    1. Hi,

      Lord’s blessings to you, your family, friends and colleagues.

      Profanity and colorful language is
      painful to me.

      I usually stop reading and listening when I hear & read it.

      I automatically assume the person is not literate/ well read.

      I gather they are not reading books and they do not have the words to describe their point or feelings. I could be wrong.

      People like me who avoid profanity and colorful language stop reading/ listening when they experience it.

      I hope my feedback was helpful.

      In recovery meetings there is a saying, take what you like, leave the rest.

      Blessings,

      Sam

      FullyFreeFilms.com

      Romans 3:1-25

  14. I love this blog! I am in the 94th percentile in terms of net worth, according to the online calculators, but I certainly don’t feel “wealthy.” Reason is that I was talking to a buddy of mine that has also done well, and we conclude that when you make it, you are even more protective and appreciative of what you have and what it took to get there. I think that many times folks need a win, a boost if you will, to give them some confidence. It pays to to walk the line in every regard (e.g., don’t drink or do drugs, don’t get into debt, get a lot of education, always retool your skills, network, etc.). Any know that one thing can bring down an entire lifetime of work in an instant. Boring makes wealth, and that often means spending more time in school and staying up late working on your moneymaker instead of hanging out at the local bar all night.

  15. Adithya Shetty

    Hi Sam,

    Great post. I agree with you; if you want to be rich be your own boss. Luckily, blogging helped me to become a full-time blogger and be my own boss!

    Thanks for sharing!

  16. Just noticed Joes comment about “lazy zionists”, whom probably went to Harvard and out earn him 20:1, but whom, probably, aren’t even Jewish.Most Billionaires, Gates, Buffet, Slim, Trump aren’t. Some, like Zuckerberg, are. None are lazy. You sir, are lazy.You blame others for your own troubles.

    You are a also a bigot, and I’m so glad you will never be prosperous.

    If I could take away the Salk vaccine(damn Zionists), lasers and GPS (damn Einstein), the atom bomb that won the war (damn Einstein Slizzard and Oppenheimer) from your life I would, but alas, you benefitted and ignore it. Over a third of US nobel winners were jewish, hardly lazy eh?

    To Financial Samurai: read the comments. While religious bigotry probably isn’t contagious to anyone with an IQ over 100, leaving those comments up is like forgetting to flush the toilet.

    Bob

    1. I love that phrase “forgetting to flush the toilet”.

      Bigotry is just wrong and here, inexcusable

  17. Most comments are fair enough and there are anecdotes for every reason why someone can or cannot get ahead. I believe there are simply not enough opportunities in the USA for well qualified people to get a paying job that is reasonable to their potential. Rather in my world, I’m often seeing lesser qualified people (for many reasons) running the show and making most of the money. Let’s not forget about luck. There are some people whom are just lucky to have been given the opportunities they have. Not saying these folk are not hard working, just saying they were more than likely not the best in many ways to get a great paying job, they were just lucky……Working 50+ a week may be needed at times, but I don’t think people competing in that or standardizing that is good for our society, nor should it be necessary just to get ahead in life.

  18. Public Domain

    Money goes to people’s heads. Everyone can discuss all the anecdotal evidence they want, but the concern is the distribution. Yes, if you work hard, you have a chance of succeeding, and some people do. But more of the people that work hard should succeed.

  19. This doesn’t square up with our taxes. Under $300000 and paying 28% as homeowners. Working 60 plus hours. We would love to pay 23%.

    1. Start a side gig and deduct the losses until profitable, then the operational expenses. Refinance tour mortgage at 3% and invest your savings. So many ways to gain an edge fairly but we don’t really h finance well enough. That said, most bankruptcy is medically related. Im all for opportunity and a stronger safety net.

  20. Excellent article. I will add that living your life being grateful for what you have and counting your blessings is a surefire way to be happy. You can always be worse off, and if you complain too much, the universe might teach you that. Love your life!

  21. Thanks Sam. Your thoughtful insight is always appreciated. Got some new financial goals to strive for!!

  22. I think there is a flaw in this logic here, the top income earners at 380k, this figure is probably only taxable income for a year, there are many other ways this group gets rich that aren’t accounted for here.

    the gap between the wealthy and poor is huge, much more so than its made out to be here. Its obvious when the owners / majority shareholder / CEO’s etc have personal jets and multiple houses but the people who clean their buildings make minimum wage.

    there is also the problem that minimum wage puts you in the “poor” category

    I agree with the statement that we are doing better than most of the world even in the poor category, it beats living in Saudi Arabia or Iraq etc, and there are many more 3rd world countries than 1st world ones. However that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for improvement

    I also agree that the working poor and the elderly have a completely legitimate reason for their taxable income.

    I do not agree that people who cannot afford children and have them anyway should be given a free pass, this is a policy that creates more financially dependent people by not being a financial burden on this group, however this statement is only true if we start providing health services like abortions and such and stop letting religious extremists prevent us from doing so. if abortion is available to this group, they should suffer a higher financial burden for each child they have rather than getting more credits and everything. I hate to say this but we need incentives to make this group of people think twice before creating more burden on our financial situation

    I also don’t agree that we should thank the rich, yes the American economic system has provided us with so many technical advancements, but these 1% or .5% etc. have many lawyers and tax professionals at their disposal to help them exploit every tax loophole possible where the average American with mere basic knowledge of how this works and files on turbotax does not. Much of this money is not treated as personal income either since its tied to business. say a CEO is the majority shareholder also in a company that does not pay him dividends, his company grosses 1 billion dollars in a calendar year, have of this in foreign banks and so forth due to outsourcing jobs, where is this money accounted for? its not shown here to really show you the gap in income.

  23. I have two problems with an otherwise informative article. The author declares that people shouldn’t have so many children yet conservatives scream about providing birth control or abortions for those with low incomes. The author also states that to move up in income, the poor can simply work more hours in their regular or a part-time job, yet again, conservatives scream about the poor not spending time with their children and their lack of parenting skills. I also don’t see the moneyed class helping to provide decent child care so the poor can improve the job status. This article simply shows the hypocrisy of the wealthy and conservatives in our society and provides an alibi for their “I’ve got mine and to hell with the rest of you” philosophy.

    1. Hi Lee,

      Don’t give up! I’m the author of this article and here are some articles that can help you forge forward:
      How To Make Six Figures At Almost Any Age

      Spoiled or Clueless? Trying Working A Minimum Wage Job As An Adult

      Abolish Welfare Mentality: A Janitor Makes $271,000 A Year, So Can You

      I don’t mind getting torn up in the comments as I realize a lot of people are frustrated and angry about something. The comment section helps alleviate that stress. But at the end of the day, it’s YOUR LIFE you’ve got to take control over. After the venting is done, take action to change it if you are not happy.

      Best,

      Sam

  24. I graphed the income distribution data for 1967, which is within the range from 1960-67 in which we had the most balanced economy in terms of not having swung overly far toward a government induced equality. Yet it was still within the years with relatively high equality, that is, not nearly the extreme inequality we have currently. 1967 was the first year for which I could find solid data for the 1960-67 range.

    I also graphed the data for 2012, a year in which inequality was fairly extreme. Both sets of data were graphed on the same chart and the income represented logarithmically so that we could get salaries ranging from $1,000/yr to a million/yr on the vertical scale. The horizontal scale represents percentile linearly from 0 to 100 so you can see exactly how the income distributes across the total population. The 1967 graph was significantly kinder to the lower 20% of the population than the 2012, despite being in the days before there was much reduction in the earlier intense economic and educational repression of minorities, including repression of opportunities even for well qualified minorities.

    I then assumed that equality is not a natural goal. We all have different levels of both ability and motivation to earn. So for me, the famed Gini Index is based on perfect equality as an ideal. In my view, this is fundamentally unnatural and therefore fundamentally misinformed. This and the assumption of zero-sum game economics is the mistake of the far left as well as Marxist thinking in many respects, although they are usually not quite the same thing.

    The graphs of 1967 and 2012 were both similar to the way a normal distribution would look in this graphic format, with income represented logarithmically. Both these sets of real data look essentially linear as plotted on the vertical logarithmic income scale versus horizontally linear percentiles between the 30th and 70th percentile. In this format, that translates to a straight line that multiplies income by the same factor for the same distance we move horizontally anywhere along the line representing an increasing percentage of the population with less income.

    So I decided to postulate an ideal distribution that was similar, but with a slope that was as much less steep than the 1967 graph as that graph was to the 2012 graph. Put another way, I hypothesized an ideal situation in which the distribution would be as much better than the 1967 as 2012 was worse. Just like a normal distribution of IQ or the length of our noses, I hypothesized that the combination of ability and motivation to earn in a homogeneous population that had no repressed minorities would also be normally distributed.

    I therefore made the slope of the linear section lower than 1967 by the same amount the 2012 was higher with the income distribution perfectly normal under this condition and in this format. This ideal consequently represented a true normal distribution instead of approximately normal as in the real data. All the data were modified in a manner that reproduced exactly the same distributions as the original data, but which assumed equal total income for equal populations. This is the only way to compare apples to apples.

    It was amazing how much better off the lower 50% in the ideal distribution was while the upper 20% hardly sacrificed a thing. There was even an inflection point at the 70th percentile at which all three graphs were at the same income. Nevertheless, the very bottom still had people who were earning less than would be necessary to live on. I assumed that this will always be so, just as there are always people with very short noses or very low IQs. We need to do something about that if we’re going to be a gentle, compassionate society without our heads stuffed way up somewhere very unrealistic.

    Then I looked into the question of how much the top 30% would have to sacrifice to allow the lowest 30% to live in minimal but adequate comfort. These populations are outside the middle linear section on all three graphs This also made no assumptions about how to implement the distribution; no assumptions about government or any other kind of involvement. I merely looked at income distribution with no tax assumptions or any kind of specific safety nets. The question was simply how much raw, untaxed income would the top 30% have to sacrifice to create livable conditions for all in the lowest 30%. On the hypothetical ideal distribution I found that only about 7% of the average income from the top 30% would provide a 24% boost in the average income of the lowest 30%. Of course, in practice it would be more sensible for these average results to be progressively distributed on both ends.

    Now if you’re going from around $25K/yr to over 31K/yr, that makes a huge difference in your potential quality of life, assuming you’re not addicted to alcohol, gambling, crack, or heroin. The difference is still greater for the extremely low incomes assuming a graduated relief scheme. If you’re going from 100K/yr to 93K/yr, that has enormously less impact on your quality of life. This is even morally justifiable in that those on the high end of the income distribution typically use a lot more public infrastructure than those on the low end. It is only right that they pay for it accordingly. I found this to be a very interesting and informative Gedankenexperiment (i.e., thought experiment, a term first made famous by Einstein, who used Gedankenexperimenten to develop his theories of relativity, not that what I’ve done is anything comparable in case there is anyone silly enough find the motivation to assume I think so).

    1. Fantastic response, Robert. Your Q-Q plot analysis adds some valuable perspective to the income disparity conversation. I also appreciate the log-transformation on income levels, while noting that the linear form may demonstrate right-tailed skewness in the distribution due to a some exceptionally higher earners. Nevertheless, the scaling is beneficial for comparison purposes and allows for the discovery of potential solutions to the growing gap between social classes.

      I think the major challenge is finding a workable method to pass 7% of top-bracket income to the bottom third in a sustainable manner. Tax legislation and other governmental intervention strategies have not yielded the best results. Perhaps the change needs to come from a general culture shift towards more socially responsible economic behavior.

      Again, this is a great post with a thoroughly constructed analysis. You let the data speak, and we’re listening.

  25. Lamse Horton

    Some very awkward statements are being made here: “A poor guy can go make $30+/hr. with Uber” – he cannot even buy gas to get to a bus station; also, I would very much like to be able to pay at the 23.27% tax rate of the average top 1% of earners. It would leave me $291,845 on which to make ends meet. Yet the lower 50% of earners only have less than $33,048 before taxes. If in the higher earners (those 25% averaging $67,280) paying 15.68% average, there was a doubling of taxes, their after tax amount would still be $46,180 or over $13,000 more than the gross of those at the 50% level. It is not the 1% that need to pay more but those 50% or below should be returned double the current withholding amount to encourage more working wage earners. Give us more information on the top 1/10 % of earners (those 140,000 earners, or 10% of the top of the 1%): How much do they earn? What would be the potential tax reduction for the balance of earners if they paid 50% over $500,000 in earnings; stepped up to 75% for those earning over $100,000,000? Since we are being told all this other historic information, educate everyone on the potential changes a few various scenarios could give and show that this would eliminate the US national debt. Using knowledge attached to computers could help everyone be more understanding and more unified.

  26. In my opinion, it is reasonable for rich people to pay more tax because they use more resources than poor people. Moreover, rich people can make money easily with stocks, capitals. Generally,working more than 40 hours per week is not a good way to become rich. The first step is to have a good financial plan, so one can have an egg in his hand. Then he can hatch this egg and wait patiently for a few hens.

  27. The biggest problem with this article, is the assumption that the ultra wealthy make money by working. They make money because the return on capital is greater than the underlying growth in the economy. If you have even a basic level of mathematical competence, you can recognize the macro economic implications of this. Capital will accumulate in the hands of the few, not due to their hard work, or expertise, but because they already have more capital. We no longer have capitalism, we have financialism. The economists, the policy makers, the politicians, everyone has been corrupted by the financial sector. In a real capitalist economy, finance is a support function. In financialism, it is a profit center, and this structure can only be supported in an environment of private sector credit expansion. It is also essentially a system of theft. The financial sector is stealing the wealth of the nation, while adding no real value. It is sad that people are too stupid to recognize it. A start is reading Pikkety’s Capital in the 21st Century, or listening to Michael Hudson.

      1. You are leveraging an angle, and if enough people do that, the angle goes away. It is the same for most of the recommendations you make. If they were done by a significant portion of people., they would cease to be an angle worth working. Most of your advice will work for a few people, but they are not suitable policies for widespread application.

  28. Hi everyone. I have a big issues with those who complain about their financial position. I’m 29yrs old and a Financial Planning Director at a fortune 500 firm. My wife and I are in the top 10% of wage earners in this beautiful country and I was NOT handed my success. People in my generation seem to have forgot what this country allows us. Freedom and democracy (yes, more of a republic) allow you the privilege to work and fight for your dreams. Too often people think they should be handed a certain lifestyle as it’s their right. After putting myself through community college, while working 40hrs a week, it became clear that I needed a 4yr degree to achieve the lifestyle I wanted. I didn’t complain about the cost. I went out and obtained a student loan to cover only the cost of tuition and books. It’s paid off now. Only had to take out around 20K. I roomed with a few other guys to save money, had two jobs totaling around 53hrs per week (I was making over 3K per month in college!), took more classes per semester than the average (night classes mostly), was involved in intramural sports, was apart of a fraternity, and was dating my now wife the whole time. More importantly, went I started all of this there was a month when I had $1.87 in my checking account and $0 in my savings. My only credit card was maxed out and I was dead broke. Instead of giving up or reaching out for a hand out I put my head down and obtained that second job. I didn’t have time to drink, smoke, watch TV, or spending money all of the crap most of us think are fixed expenses. Wake up people. Stop complaining and work for what you want. If you don’t want a big house, early retirement, kids, traveling money, or nice cars then don’t work hard. You get out what you put in. It’s that simple.

  29. A second option is to concentrate at getting better at what you do so you can command more money per hour and work less. I have a small painting business primarily residential repaints. I worked hard at it and worked long hours for many years. I never felt I was getting ahead even though I did have a good life I just seemed to miss too much of it while I worked. I set a goal to earn the same relative amount while working far fewer hours (20 hours per week) I set about doing this by concentrating at being better and faster, raising my rates, and increasing the number of bid opportunities so I could be more picky about the jobs I took. It took me seven years but three years ago I met my goal. I work around 1000 hours per year and have an income that allows me to own two reliable vehicles a 3 bedroom one and a half bath house on 8 acres and the time to enjoy it.

  30. An extra 5% tax on the bottom 50% of wage earners, by your own numbers, would produce about 54 billion in taxes. An extra 5% tax on the top 50% of wage earners would more than eliminate the deficit. (And yes, I would be included in that, I’m somewhere in the top 10% by your numbers.)

    In order for the bottom 50% to pay an addtional 5%, they would need to sacrifice food and housing two weeks a year, since pretty much all of their income goes to those necessities. In order for the top 1% to pay an additional 5% a year, they wouldn’t notice the difference.

    And many in the bottom 50% are already working multiple jobs, much longer than 40 hours a week in order just stay where they are. 80 hours a week at minimum wage is still in the bottom 50%, again by your numbers. And of course, working that sort of schedule leaves you to tired to do much to improve your life. To say nothing of child care costs, eating out more because you don’t have time to cook, etc.

    To borrow a phrase: Why do you tax the rich? Because that’s where the money is.

    1. I would agree. Everyone should have skin in the game, but expecting to erase the deficit on the backs of the poor seems pretty callous to me. Poor and working class people already pay taxes well and above the federal income tax: State taxes, property taxes, licensing fees, sales taxes, gas tax, etc…. This includes those who pay NO federal income tax at all.

      While it is true that the top 10% of income earners pay over 69% of all taxes, the top 10% by wealth also control over 71% of total US wealth. So while income and wealth don’t always correlate, the burden on the top is probably about right and should probably be even higher on the ultra-rich – those with incomes over 5MM per annum.

  31. There’s an interesting article in the New York Times today on how “Top 1%” income varies by a factor of 10x depending on where you live…

    To be in the top 1% of incomes nationally, you need to take in a minimum of $389,436. In New York (Manhattan), you need to be making $1,425,000 annually to be in the top 1%. People making $389,000 in New York are only in the top 10% for their region!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/business/your-local-1-percenters-may-not-be-as-rich-as-you-think.html

  32. There’s 168 hours in a week you do not need exactly 8hrs of sleep per night 6-8 hrs is suffcient, some people need more some need less. Anyways that gives you roughly 120hrs you can be working…and for anyone who wants to only work 40 don’t complain when i’m under 30 driving a maserati, owning two business with a vacation home and retired before 40 and 100% debt free and making 6 figures doing nothing because i chose to hustle my ass off and build not one, but two business and invest in myself. You need to find a demand for something, and supply it… You are either helping someone else follow their dreams or working on following your own. 9-5:30 are bankers hours. In order to get ahead you have to be above average and do more then the average person…

      1. Robby Wacker

        Obviously the people who read this article and agree with it have never had a need and only know how privileged people live. I would like to know how a person raised on a 40 cow dairy in northern Minnesota who started working at the age of 10 5am get on a school bus at 7 am arriving at school 8: 20 return home at 5 pm finish chores around 7;30. At age 15 work 20 hrs on weekends to buy a car and pay insurance. During the winter months never getting paid more than 20$ a week for working 7 days a week on family farm. And 100$ a week during weekends.. from 1979 to 1987.. who’s parents never cleared more than 1400$ a year even though they worked 7 days a week no less than 12 hrs a day every day of the year never missing a day no matter what, sick or injured make more money? Then join the United States military making 700$ month after 7 years making 1100$ Even though being promoted 6 ranks before being injured and discharged..attend 5 years of college becoming educated take a job starting at 24,000 after 7 years making 25,500$ quit after working 140 hrs in 13 days with no overtime being salary. Get denied a 1$ hr pay raise quite to find better job spend two years unemployed applying to more than 40 jobs in 20 different states. Have to take a minimum wage job at age 32 bring home 48$ a day , even though owning 3 homes. Finally due to military injuries can no longer due physically the only work I know. Become unemployed, apply for veterans disability in 2004 have to sell everything except for the home I live in.. no children or family. Wait 7 yrs and day that sheriff is going to evict me from my home finally get approval from va for 100% disabled save home and pay all debt in 2011 . Lose ssi due to being unemployed for more than 5 yrs and now live on 3000$ a month unable to ever make more… no savings no 401 or stocks no assets..age 50 no ssi till 65 but will have to wait until 70 just to get more than 700$ a month…. so please tell me how I can get rich you uppity privilege fucks who obviously don’t have any clue what it means to work your ass off only to be looked down on by your arrogant ignorant ass! Non of you ever gave or served anyone but your self! I have never been able to live how I would want to because my military service left me having to live the best I can but now knowing I sacrificed my life so you can tell me I just need to try harder.. it makes me sick to think my life was wasted giving you your easy life and for what. A ignorant President who has purposed reducing my benefits from 3000 to 300 and letting ssi give me the 700 $ that I earned working 21 years never making over 25,500 a year until now on disability that I had to give lord and bone to get…every person making 75,000 a year should pay no less than 40% taxes why? Because you owe people like me with out people who sacrifice their life you would have nothing! Your food comes from people who work sun up to sun down most never make more than 10$ hr many make less just so you have cheap food… you have no clue how much you would pay if farmers were paid the same as you! If the people who feed you or ensure you are safe by protecting this nation made what you make! Which is what they should and you should be working for minimum wage or less… non of you provide food or security for anyone but your self…think if you had to pay 10 x more for your food you wouldn’t think it’s so easy to just work harder or you just need to want it more…pathetic take a long look at your life and honestly answer what is your true self worth when your life is only possible because of me and my people….I grow most of my food I have never needed any one of you yet you have needed me and my kind every day of your life and you have no clue till now! Please I want you to look at how the American farm is suffering from the trade war. Look at how 22 veterans commit suicide every day because they are broken providing security for your privilege ass… and now American farmers have surpassed veterans in this on average 25 family farmers are killing them self… so please enjoy your safety and enjoy your meals because the truth is it is covered with our blood just so you can think you have what you have because you earned it when really it has been given to you and you have never deserved any of it.
        I know that I am not a proper writer so you don’t need to point out my dyslexia I know. But I really do want to hear what you have to say.. it will only provide more proof of the things I have said about you by the way you reply… I know this also… but I am still looking forward to seeing your message.

        Your humble servant.
        R Wacker
        Disabled veteran
        Army 86-93 Staff sergeant
        North Dakota state university
        92-95 deans list honors
        Alpha Gamma Rho

        1. Mark Fuckerburg Zucks

          Mr Wacker, thank you for your service to our country. Now, did you do it for free? You act like there wasn’t a benefit to you. Didn’t it allow you to escape that miserable farm job for $1400 per year?!
          What’s with the hating on people making more money than you? Did you serve them or not? When I give someone a gift, I don’t expect a return. When I service someone as a professional, I expect payment that is fair market or fair payment from my employer. I wouldn’t spend 7 years there for a measly $1500 raise over that time!! Geesh man, have respect the your skills and time…. move on to something else or somewhere else to get your worth instead of boiling over with anger and resentment. I had kind of a similar situation with my last job, also of 7 years. I started it in 2011 during a down economy in healthcare…because Obama wrecked the healthcare and student loan industry for years. I went from making $70k range per year to $140k with a 10% of income into my 401k as benefit. Sounds nice huh? After the gubermint took a huge percentage of it to taxes then kicked me in the nuts further by not letting me write off any of my $1200 a month payment towards a $300k student loan debt at 6.5 to 8.5% interest! That’s thank you fuck tard Obama. I could explain that further but you numb nuts wouldn’t get it.( I went back to school in 2008) All I’ll hear about how rich I am. This was 2011 time frame. Health costs also sky rocketed to $1200 to 1400 a month as a high deductible cost plan…again thank you fuck terd Obama. So, because of the economy he worsened and increased unemployment, I was stuck in my job too…until changes in 2016 when Trump unleashed this monster economy. Oh, btw, I doubled my income before but had LESS money in my pockets. Let that sink in. I didn’t buy anything new either; kept same house and cars etc (not 3 houses!). That also required a huge sacrifice of time, energy,and stress. Plus that 300k investment. I had to sell an awesome home I built to pay off 150k of that school loan. So here it is 2019 and was at 150k something earlier in the year. I paid 1100 to 1400 per month since summer of 2011. The original loan was 150k then went to 180k over the course of school. I have paid in 115k but the balance was still 154000!! Boo fucking hoo right?Now it’s 139k. No worries, since our GREAT prez fixed things and the economy is humming, I changed jobs and can make extra money if I choose. This year I will make 222k with additional hours increasing that to 258k then an extra job adding just over 10k. Instead of degrading me for getting my keep you should congratulate my work. Now, there are some downsides to this money I’m making. I travel by plane every week on my dime and stay away from my family 7 days working 104 hours then I’m off 7 days unless I choose to work a little bit although I haven’t yet. I work nighttime, holidays, and weekends. I deal with life and death in high stress situations. I had to go to expensive and stressful training spanning a little over 8 years total. It’s risk and reward. I pay my huge share of taxes too.
          I have no control over the little people. I can’t control their work ethic and drive to earn money. I can’t control their crazy ideas to buy cars they can’t afford or housing. I have a pretty nice house now and I won’t lie but the vehicles are nothing special. Me and the wife share the hotrod luxury mini van, my daughter drives my Poopus (Prius) and my son has an old BMW, 2007. The newest car is 2014. My other daughter is 18 and will need a car too. I don’t have one at my awayjob either but would like one.
          You are making more money now not working at 3k a month than your best working year at 26k. So why are you complaining about that? Find a side hustle, listen to Paula Pant’s Afford Anything to get help. If we’re living in America then we are lucky with many opportunities! This is a blessed nation. Open your eyes and rewire your thinking. Instead of blasting rich people, ask how you could do the same. I did. I’m a few years younger than you and also grew up without internet resources. My dad was a Sgt first class with 23 years and injured in Vietnam. He works with his injuries while looking for some disability I’ll add. I didn’t have a silver spoon and was closer to poor growing up. My parents did the best they could and I will do the same for my kids. Take the chip off your shoulders because there are always examples of people who have it worse than you. No offense, but I don’t think you would have climbed the hill I did to get where I am.

    1. The problem with this idea is the false notion that starting your own business is the only way to survive in an American economy. Owning a business is fantastic, so long as your business is not overburdened by BS regulations and taxes, so much so that operating a business is choked financially. Even so, there’s also nothing wrong with manufacturing workers being satisfied with fair wages; LIVING wages. Unfortunately that is something of an American past-time. Apparently the communist mentality infecting our nation is work is considered a devalue, but yet highly valued by share holders, corporate managers, and CEO’s. If you are a worker, even with a Master’s Degree, then you are not entitled to the “good life”. This fits pretty close to Marxism where only business owners, Wall Street crooks, and lazy Zionists are entitled to a good life.

  33. I’m sorry, but this article is utterly delusional and disingenuous. It almost seems like it was taken off a Wall Street Journal editorial by some right-wing corporatist hack (no offense).

    First off, I would argue there’s a HUGE difference between the 1% (doctor) and the 0.1% (hedge fund manager). The doctor probably ends up paying between 30-40% effective tax rate because all of his/her income is earned (through labor). In addition, the doctor actually contributes to society. Whereas the hedge fund manager has long-term capital gains taxed at 15% or lower (like Mitt’s multi-million dollar Roth IRA). And what exactly do they do, aside from moving big numbers around from one account to another on a computer screen?

    With the recent Panama Papers scandal, the obviousness of big companies and rich elites not paying their taxes was made clearly evident for all to see. Ironically, you can rightly argue the richest are NOT paying their fair share of taxes.

    Second, in a society and government which provided the infrastructure, security, and means to become successful, it’s completely reasonable to expect the highest earners to contribute back to society in the form of higher taxes. Why should a company be able to undergo corporate inversions and restructuring in order to avoid paying US taxes, when the company, for all intents and purposes, was created and flourished in the US? Talk about unfair.

    Speaking of paying taxes, what about the regressive tax structure we currently have in place that phases out social security tax after $100k or so (I don’t remember the exact number at the moment)? The poor and middle class are on the hook for this, and so much more. I would argue that until the bottom 50% have access to free health care, education, child care etc. that makes it possible for them to rise from poverty and become successful, they should be exempt from taxes.

  34. From what I’ve learned and watched in my classes, the rich are highly unlikely to want to pay more for employees. In fact, in order to make more money, they’d try to hire fewer workers – give them a slightly higher wage – and make them work more.

    So sure, they pay “more”, but in the end, other people end up losing jobs or making sacrifices.

    I feel like this biased article is stating “equality” for the wrong group of people. Making “charities”? Like what? Many big corporation leaders spend a portion of their money lobbying for laws that would benefit THEIR companies, not for the people, so they can keep making more money. And at what cost? Killing the environment and the lower-income.

  35. Wendy D. Smith

    I’m in the top 10% of wage earners, yet I refuse to work more than 40 hours a week. I don’t have to. I focus on quality instead of quantity. I’m highly skilled and well educated. I work smarter, not harder. I’m doing my part and not twiddling my thumbs. I don’t expect to retire early and have no wish to. I’d be bored out of my skull. Incidentally, it helps tremendously to love what you do for a living.

    On the other hand, in a married household with two young children and both adults working full-time jobs, it’s all about balancing work and home. I understand the belief that working more hours gets a hard worker the “keys to the kingdom” (whatever that is). But I’ve learned that’s a delusion, a myth. Too many people work like dogs their entire lives, and at the end of it have nothing to show for that hard work. If more money makes you happier, gives you better well-being, then great – go for it. But it’s not true for everyone, it’s not a guarantee, and it certainly wasn’t true for me. I’ve no desire to climb the corporate ladder or play the competition game or work myself to death in the (often vain) attempt to “retire early”. It’s exhausting and nowhere near as fulling as the time I spend with my family. That’s my choice. That’s my happy.

    There’s too much emphasis here on money being the savior of all things, that money equals morality, and the implication that more money is never ENOUGH money. It’s a little disturbing. Thanking the rich for paying more? That’s disturbing. Have you ever tried to live on less than 30,000 a year? That’s tough. Less than $23,283 (the poverty line for a family of four)? That’s almost impossible. Yet you think they should contribute MORE in taxes? The people who pay more in taxes are the people who can AFFORD it – who can actually live and still prosper while paying more. The utter ignorance here is astounding.

    1. My question to you is why is a couple having 2 children when they only make $23,283 per year combined in the first place? That is one person in this family of 4 making $11 an hour working 40 hours per week. I’m sorry you made poor life choices, but why should I be paying for it? This is not ignorance! I worked hard and from nothing to make it to the 1%. No handouts, no family money, just me wanting to be more. If I can do it, anyone can. Why should I pay more when other pay none? Roughly half of Americans even pay taxes. The bottom 90% of those half only pay roughly 30% of the taxes. So 5% of the entire population pays 70% of the taxes. ENOUGH!!

      1. Wendy D. Smith

        Your stats are deceptive. 45% pay no taxes because they have no taxable income or they get enough tax breaks to erase liability. The highest income homes pay a highly disproportionate amount in taxes because they make an extremely disproportionately high amount of money. This would hold true even if we had a simple flat tax.

        There’s a bit more to it than “poor life choices”. No one chooses poverty. That’s a cliched falsehood that makes us feel better. Should our society, the wealthiest in the world, be so precarious that one catastrophe, one illness, or one stupid mistake, condemns a person or family to lifelong poverty? No. Yet our society does. It absolutely does. And once a family is sent into poverty, it is incredibly difficult to rise out of it – the statistics prove this.

        I consider myself privileged enough to give the poor some empathy and help they desperately need. I don’t begrudge my contribution. Like you, I’ve worked hard. I’ve earned my way. I live well. I’m in the black. I pay my taxes. I don’t complain about paying more than others less fortunate than myself.

        So Yes, you should pay for it. Because you can afford to. Because it’s the right thing to do.

        1. Just in case someone else stumbles across this article, as I did, and questions whether poverty is, in fact, a choice: I think my experience is relevant. I started work at 17 and did everything “right”. I worked for a few years right out of high school, then put myself through the first two years of a college degree with the intention of transferring to a 4 year university. In that time, my husband and I used our tax returns to save up to buy our own home, which we accomplished. It was a struggle, but a bearable one. We had one child, but our lives were on track and we could afford to have her at the time. This was before the ACA existed, when a lot of lower income Americans didn’t have health insurance if their jobs didn’t offer it, and since neither of our jobs did, we had to go without. Then I found out I had cancer.

          Luckily, I survived, but it had a devastating effect on our financial situation. Not only were we suddenly saddled with incredible medical expenses, but I was permanently disabled from the surgeries I underwent in the attempt to save my life, and we were left a single income family with a child we didn’t regret, but struggled to provide for. It can be very tough out there.

          It doesn’t matter how hard you’ve worked if some tragedy comes along and sweeps the rug out from under you, and without some kind of social safety net, you’re just out of luck. To then have to listen to the blissful ignorance of people who believe that you just “made bad choices” is insult on top of injury. The great majority of the bottom 50% work just as hard if not harder, with far less to look forward to in terms of class mobility, than the middle class…we don’t want hand outs, but we should be able to work our 40 hours a week and live off of that without having to turn to the federal government to supplement our income off the backs of the average American taxpayer.

  36. All this high and mighty “look at me I’m somebody” capitalism will be going out the window in a few years as efficiency approaches the point where we have business owners, and a few engineer and service jobs. Leaving 90% of the population at the point where they have to make the decision between killing the rich to eat or dying. A cruel heartless world can get pretty cruel when it has to. If there’s no help for the disadvantaged or down on their luck, they will survive using other means.

  37. Problem…
    We have SO many that don’t have the skills to do some of the jobs they are in, or just do as little work possible, and others who do the lion’s share of the work.
    How do we figure out who gets paid what when some are simply lazy?
    Who decides what medical care is “necessary”, what are “acceptable side effects ” & who is allowed to have what medical services in a socialist society?
    Can Bernie Sanders or one of his followers tell us more details about his plan? Who decides what will be covered under this medical plan?

    What other services will be afforded to young people with babies? Children? Older parents that may need some help in their homes?

    What happens should rich people leave the country?

    What will we do with huge homes? Cracker box homes?

    How will people learn self-responsibility?

    What do we do about abusive hierarchy in the workplace in infrastructure jobs?

    Where will these new jobs come from without these people having a place to work?

    What about underserved medical areas with not enough doctors in needed specialties?

    What do we do with older Americans that can work, would like to work, yet can only work part-time?

    How does he expect to get his plans through Congress?

    What is to stop subsequent Presidents, governors, county & city council persons from getting power hungry and turning this country into another dictatorship – at the federal &/or state &/or local levels?

    Who divides up land for people to live on? How will this be implemented in terms of housing?

    What happens when people want to live in nicer, more temperate areas vs. Deserts and colder areas? Will this not stress the environment?

  38. If the top 20% pay 84% of the federal tax that would leave only 16% of the federal tax paid by the remaining 80%.
    Questions are, how much of the federal tax is consumed by the states to fund state and local programs? Does the bottom 80% actually pay a federal tax at all if the states are consuming 16% or more of federal taxes? More likely the states consume more than 16%. That would mean the bottom 80% do not fund federal programs at all. Do we, bottom 80%, believe we are entitled to something in which we don’t pay for? Or are we being greedy to live off the top 20% when they are paying to have our freedom protected? I find it insulting to have someone tell me I don’t pay or give enough to them when I already feed and protect them.
    If you want to really know you are paying an actual federal tax then 2 things you need to do. 1) Are you in the top 20%? 2) How much do the states consume from federal taxes to pay for its own state and city programs?

  39. C. Jeremy De Paz

    Your article is purely statistical, you obviously didn’t grow up “poor”. There are lots of reasons why people in poverty stricken areas do not advance economically. For one the education they get is usually very poor. People often don’t get the information and guidance they need to be successful. When you’re poor, you’ll most likely go to a shitty public school (second rate education), live in a crime-stricken neighborhood, and you’ll have have very few opportunities to get involved with cool programs that require money. If you’re informed enough to know about and how to apply scholarships, you’ll apply for those, but it’ll already be an uphill battle for you because your education sucks and there are plenty of students from upper and middle class families applying for these scholarships too. Of course those students have a better education then you, and probably know more people who have been successful, so they’re better suited to win these scholarships. The list goes on and on. Income inequality is not a product of people not wanting to work hard. It’s a product of our society. I encourage you to visit a school in a poverty stricken area. See the culture, and how keeping crime out of some schools becomes a bigger focus than the education a lot of times.

  40. Cheeses Priced

    “If things were fair, the top 1% would only have to pay 20% of total income taxes since 20% is their share of total income. Alas, the rich pay almost double what they owe.”

    I disagree and would say, as a tax professional, that this extremely deceptive for many reasons:

    The federal income tax isn’t the only tax. Payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, import taxes, gas taxes, cigarette taxes etc… Some Americans may not pay federal income tax but they still pay taxes.

    We have graduated (progressive) tax rates for annual income because people need each marginal dollar less. The standard deduction + one personal exemption is $10,300; unsurprisingly, people need their 10,000th annual dollar earned far more than their 100,000th or millionth.

    Everyone in the American economy is interdependent, but you wouldn’t know it looking at corporate salaries of the .1%. A full year’s work for my CEO is allegedly worth 400 years of work of the average accountant or analyst that actually creates a supports the product that brings in the money in the first place. It’s easy to get tunnel vision about how you personally work hard and earn your salary, and easy to forget the higher you’re promoted and the more you earn, the more you rely on the labor of other people to even have a job in the first place.

    The other overlooked aspect of the economy is aggregate demand. For the economy to work, it isn’t just about doing skilled labor to earn a salary – it’s about spending money because aggregate demand is what actually creates our jobs. As you’ve pointed out, the bottom 90% save on average 4% of their income while the top 1% save 38%. The reality is that poor people are far better job creators than the rich because they actually put the money they make back into the economy. 0% interest rates, stock buybacks… we don’t have a shortage of saved money in the U.S. We need more spending by those who have the money and the moral obligation to do so, and if they won’t, you tax them.

  41. Your whole arguments flawed, in my eyes, due to your understanding of what is ‘fair’. Paying 20% of taxes for taking 20% isn’t the way taxes do or should work. If that was the case we could privatise everything. The only reason they only take 20% is because they have enough money to support themselves. The reason one supports state intervention is because we realise that the system we grow up in inherently favours those born in richer areas and at birth no one is by any means given the same opportunities. regardless of how much you want to talk about rare bottom to the top success stories, the fact is that if you come from a poor area you are far far more likely to end up in a poor earning job than if your parents had the money to pay for a private education and bring you up in a wealthy area. Those are the kids that will end up in high paid jobs, and those that grew up in poor areas will, statistically, end up in a worse situation financially. You won’t suddenly see a year of students in an extremely poor area graduate and move on to become bankers and lawyers, just as you won’t suddenly see a year of privately educated students turn to crime and drug dealing to support themselves. These problems aren’t to do with work ethic and motivation, and if they are it’s a product of the environment that these children have grown up in. Was it anyone’s fault that they were born where they were born? Is it right for us to blame someone for having poor parents and just let them deal with that situation? That’s why we tax, because we recognise the unfairness of the situation – to at least try and put people on an even playing field, because currently that is not the way things are. The bigger the wealth divide the more we pull apart society. Poverty equals crime. Fact. Privileged people who don’t have to face that reality abhor the poor and the criminal with no thought as to the social causes for the situation. It creates a class war. That’s why I think when you say ‘fair’ I think your wrong. Example. if there are two people in front of you, one is a millionaire and the other struggles to pay rent and buy food. You are given 100,000 dollars to share between them, who would you give it to? Equality would have us split the amount evenly, but could we perhaps recognise that that amount of money means far more to the poor person? It means more in that it allows him the means to support himself to a decent standard. Food for him and his children, security of knowing his family will have somewhere to sleep or that he might put his children through college. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EQUALITY AND EQUITY .
    ‘If everyone was a millionaire no one would be rich’. IF EVERYONE WERE A MILLIOAIRE WE WOULD HAVE ABOLISHED POVERTY! It’s appalling to me that someone could be comfortable spending millions on arbitrary material goods while there are people struggling to stay alive, and further for you to defend that right

  42. You make it sound like if you just work more you will suddenly get wealthy. I have news for you it isn’t true. I was working three jobs, leaving the house at 7 a.m and not coming home until 11 p.m and was still only earning 24,000 per year. Granted some of that time was “wasted” on travel time between jobs, but I worked my tail off and got no where. While I watched the CEO’s of the company waltz in and work 40 hour work weeks and get millions of dollars, doing far less actual work than I was. I decided to go to grad school, which is where I am currently but it isn’t as simple as you make it sound.

    1. I believe Sam is unmarried and do not have kids, so working 60+ hours a week doesn’t seem like much. I know people who have families who work that hard, but that really strains the relationships.

      When my son was born, my work ethic changed. I spent less time at work, but tried to be more efficient. I also worked from home more frequently to offset the time I miss due to child rearing duties (my wife also works FT).

      The bottom line is that you should work enough to enjoy the things you value.

      P.S. I disagree that CEOs work 40 hrs/wk. Most of them work 10-12 hrs/day, and they are “on-call” 24 hours/day, 365 days/yr. However, even the worst ones will get a nice severance package/golden parachute when they screw up and get fired by the board. A CEO is the only job where gross incompetence can be rewarded.

  43. This article is disingenuous. “Average” per capita income is an unreliable measure because it can be strongly skewed to the upside by people earning phenomenal incomes — which is exactly what happens in the case of the US. Median income is a much better indication of how people are faring. By the article’s own Income Tax figures, the median adjusted gross income was about $33K, a far cry from the $48K “average” income reported in the article.

    The article also conveniently forgets that there’s a FICA tax as well that falls squarely on the shoulders of the bottom 80%. Adding in the 15% Social Security and Medicare taxes, or even just the portion of it paid by employers, makes a complete sham of the “Average Effective Tax Rate” column in Individual Income Tax Table presented above.

    This article is misleading to the point of being dishonest.

  44. James Brown @ Financial Freedom Reverse

    I agree that everyone can earn the sum of money he needs or wants. But after reading a great book “The 80/20 Principle” I made sure that one shouldn’t work harder to earn more. Even more than 40 hours … as noted. The main question is “how productive and efficient is your work?”. So we must try to answer that question and improve our daily life in all areas, including finance by following the Pareto Principle. Because I always prefer simplicity and productivity.

  45. Pingback: Financial Samurai Reader Demographics | Financial Samurai

  46. Legally, i don’t pay tax too and my earnings qualify me as the top 1% according to the article above. How Is that possible?

    Step one – give up your American citizenship and take up citizenship in countries where there is no capital gain tax. There are really nice places to live where capital gain tax is zero. Google and you’ll find.

    Then set up a limited liability company to expense away all your taxable income. Engage in as many businesses or professions that generate wealth thru capital gain as you can. There are many different options to suit a wide variety of interests. You just need to do some homework

    That’s it. You can be top 1% earner and legally not pay a single cent of income tax.

  47. Pingback: Scraping By On Five Hundred Thousand A Year | Financial Samurai

  48. Dane Hinson

    It’s interesting how your perspective begins to change once you realize how much opportunity is out there. When I was getting through college I always considered a six figure salary as true wealth. The pinnacle of success. Once you start to grind through your career you begin to realize how many income opportunities there are. It just takes determination and diligence to realize your earning potential.

  49. OHHH, just “$43 dollars a month”…???!!! I’d be homeless if I had to spend that much more on taxes! I’ve worked my ass off all my life and I am struggling to survive living in San Francisco. Actually, I only WORK in SF. In reality I have to live in Oakland because you assholes have made it IMPOSSIBLE for me to live within an hour of my place of work. Assuming that I can afford anything more than my already month-to-month livelihood is moronic! This is coming from a graduate of a masters program at one of your private institutions you speak of. Sorry my daddy didn’t know any of you techies for me to earn a living wage out here….

    1. Wait, so I’m an asshole because you can’t live in San Francisco? How does that work? I’ve paid over $100,000 in income taxes a YEAR that gets redistributed by the government to help society. I donate to my local SF library and volunteer for local community events. How much do you pay in taxes and what do you do?

      I just spent 6 months putting together The Best of Financial Samurai eBook to help empower people to lead better financial lives. If you buy it, all proceeds after expenses gets donated to a charity that help keep Oakland youths off the streets and in the classroom. It’s called Alive & Free. As an Oakland resident, maybe you’d like to pitch in instead of blame others for your problems?

      Here are some other posts you’ll like:

      A Massive Generational Wealth Transfer Is Why Everybody Will Be OK – But, I’m thinking maybe not you?
      Stocks or Real Estate: It Depends On How LUCKY You Are – Are you someone who attributes other people’s success to luck and your success to hard work? If so, you’ll love this post!

      1. I am not sure that he is meaning strictly you but more aimed at the people who make comments similar to yours about how people just need to work more and move to higher income areas without taking into account that it isn’t that simple. You may or may not have thought about the difficulty in doing such a thing even though it is good advice if someone can afford it. A large majority of jobs in places that don’t have unions do not allow overtime forcing you to come in late or take long lunches to prevent you from getting it and even writing you up should you accrue more than an hour of it. This limits peoples possibilities to getting a second job which since most companies prevent you from working a second job in the same field can make things difficult. Combine that with the fact that most of these types of people are living paycheck to paycheck and unable to save up the money necessary for a move to a higher income area and working those area may actually cost them more in transportation expenses then what they are earning extra. This is part of the backlash that so many people with money receive because of comments that would be sound advice for someone not struggling just to get by. You hear it time and time again, work harder, work more, move to a better place, I did it why can’t you, just go to college. The worst part is that if you compare payment between jobs a couple decades ago to jobs now the low income jobs, adjusted for inflation, pay roughly the same to within a dime or two while as you advance up the pay increases between the times steadily increase.

        1. I hear you. There is no easy solution, and everybody has a different set of circumstances to deal with.

          The one thing we can control is our effort. Never fail due to a lack of effort. Fail due to bad luck or circumstance, but go down fighting until the very end. Work on a side hustle, an X Factor from 4am-7am before work, and then from 8pm – midnight after work. Don’t stop trying.

          Life is reasonably comfortable in America (I’m in Cambodia now where I just witnessed 4 year old kids walk miles to school in 98 degree heat after I asked the driver where they were going). The worst is REGRET for having never tried, and having never tried hard enough.

          1. Home Venture Group

            FS,

            I could not agree with you more. If you want it bad enough make a plan. Read more, find a mentor, work harder, side gig, find something that is scalable and GO FOR IT!!!
            The only limitations we have is in our mind.

  50. Pingback: The Top 1% Net Worth Amounts By Age | Financial Samurai

  51. Ppl on here are so crazy frustrating it’s insane. How can people be so blind. 84% of taxes are paid by the top 20%, which starts around 70,000$ a year. Someone making 389,000/yr should not be taxed at same rate of someone making 20 mill/yr no matter how the income is made. Corporate tax is a joke, not one investor on earth in anything says “let me pay my fair share.” I just don’t understand what people can do with the second billion that they couldn’t do with the first. If everyone is trying to pay as little as possible, and one group of people have unlimited resources to help them, who’s really paying the greatest portion? The richest of the rich are getting richer and richer and are so out of touch due to greed and power that someday our kid’s kids will experience their own ‘French Revolution’ if taxes aren’t reformed.

  52. US consists of 2 category of retirees. Ones protected by pension, and ones who are not. The web is full of articles on how 401K is same as pension, when it is NOT. It is high time individuals are given more choices to save, with no pension to rely on, in most of corporate world.

    – A request from hard working middle income group, who can never be on Govt subsidies.

  53. Pingback: Can Anyone Be An Accredited Investor? The Government Can't Tell | Financial Samurai

  54. DJ an economist

    This article is somehow misleading. The important point of misunderstanding is that “Income Split Point” is the dividing line of each income layers, and it does not mean average income of the layers. This article does not show the definition of this terminology and relates it to the average income of each layer. My understanding is that it is the bottom line of each layer, from which the next layer begins.

    The average compensation for top 1% in 2011 was $10.5 million, a lot bigger than the split point of $380 thousand something. They are compensated with stock options and other bonuses as well.
    Check this article in Forbes.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottdecarlo/2012/04/04/americas-highest-paid-ceos/

    Tax burden share can have implications, but it is also misleading. Some 15% in America is now living under the poverty line. By the very definition of poverty line, it means the subsistence income that enables poor people merely keep their subsistence.

    Should such people pay income tax as well? They may not pay income tax, but they pay the same indirect tax when they buy a Big Mac.
    Regards!

    1. DJ an economist

      I correct the mistake in my previous comment. The compensation of $10.5 million in 2011 in Forbes article was for the chief executives of top 500 companies, and so it does not mean the compensation for top 1%. I don’t know why I was confused at the time. I intended to indicate the misleading concept of the “Income Split Point”, which does not mean the average but the border line of each income layer. Thanks.

      1. According to that chart the average AGI of the 1% after taxes is $924,000. It is $14,956 for the bottom 50%. That is AGI. The wealthy have many tools to work the A part so the I part looks lower than it is. Setting that aside, compare $924,000 per year to $15,000 per year. Who can afford to pay more in taxes from this calculation? Can the poor folks struggling to get by on 924k a year, get by on say 800k a year? Ask the $15k/year folks.

        Another perspective, it will take the 15k folks over 61 years to make the amount the 924k folks make in one year. A long lifetime of working to make what the 1% make in one year. Do the 924K folks compress the equivalent of a long lifetime of work of the 15k folks into their work year. can they flip 61 times more burgers in a year than the guy that’s been stuck doing that for 20 years? I know many white collar professionals work very hard. They also surround themselves in luxury while they do it. The the doctor entrepreneur do his 80 hours a week as a construction site laborer with a side of fast food slinging and another of pick up yard work, for a bottom 50% income. See which he finds harder to do.

        The fact is, our system REQUIRES a large % of poor people; it generates them. Wealth is made from actual work. But in our system, being wealthy means you get income and more wealth simply by having enough wealth to “invest”. You don’t earn that. That wealth is created by the lower income workers who do actual work. But it goes to those wealthy enough to “invest”. It is utterly absurd to suggest, in our system, the way work is currently valued, that everyone CAN get ahead. Everyone can’t. Only a few can. If everyone in the US had a high IQ and a PhD, there would still have to be hotel maids, burger flippers, slaughterhouse workers, farm workers, factory workers, baristas and on and on. They CAN’T be well off in our system. Stop pretending that they can if they just work harder or smarter.

        What needs to happen, more than tax reform is a radical reform in understanding and appreciating the value of work. Menial labor is required for our society to function. It is required for the wealthy to be wealthy. What would be “FAIR” is the recognition of the true value of all types of work that make our society function, and the rewards of that work be more fairly distributed. When that happens, sure, let’s talk universal flat tax. Until then, you are a horses ass to suggest it.

        1. What a great post. If everyone worked harder and get more skills, then by definition, they cannot enter the 10% or 1%, but still be at the 50% level or below.

          Every agrees that the top earners pay more (in absolute and relative terms) than those who are poor. But flat taxes don’t make sense in a logarithmic world. If I made $100k, and $15k goes to my flat tax, the remaining $75k is enough to have a good middle-class lifestyle. If I made $25k, then about $3800 goes to taxes. Since I’m much closer to the margin, this $3800 means much more to me than the $15k to the $100k earner, and especially to the $1million earner who pays $150k.

          A progressive tax system is a fair tax system. We must strive to continually improve and simplify it. But as a tax philosophy, it is much more fair than a flat tax.

          On the spending side, all the rage is on small items like scientific research, government salaries, arts funding, etc. If you’re serious about balancing budget and reducing spending, you only need to look at Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, and Defense. These items make up about 75% of our budget. Serious cuts or reforms in these items will need to be made, but in our political climate, would be impossible.

  55. I’d like your opinion and others input on this question:
    I need to park $400k for approx 1-2 years. At which time I would then use it to purchase a house.. however for that 1-2 years, i’d like it to be working for me, but don’t want to lose it either.. I was considering putting it into PPF and/or PGF.. looking at the history of those ETF, they both seem relatively stable when the market fluctuates and they pay a nice dividend.. so it “appears” to me they are somewhat stable and safe investment.

    I’m close to retirement and have other funds invested already, and I just sold my property and will rent until i figure out where I want to live and retire..

    Thoughts and Opinions?
    Appreciate any feedback you and your readers may have.

    1. 1-2 years is an insufficient time horizon for any equity investment to guarantee you a return. Buy a t-bill or park it in a high yield savings account. The return sucks but if you can’t afford to have under 400k in 1-2 years when you need that money than you can’t afford to take the volatility risk.

  56. Pingback: The Top One Percent Income Levels By State | Financial Samurai

  57. Pingback: The State Of The Union Address 2015 Cheat Sheet | Financial Samurai

  58. YES, Work harder at your minimum wage job, better yet work two minimum wage jobs, 80 hours a week, $7.25 * 80*52, and you, slacker that you are, still will top out at 30k. Don’t tell me that the big wage earners have opportunities that you don’t have, and you know how they slave away at those ego-suffocating jobs. You low wage earners just need to uproot your family and move to a city with high tech jobs…not that you have the skills or education to get any of those jobs….then there’s that spendthrift government, providing benefits to veterans and healthcare to all Americans, monitoring our security, food, water, and air..

    A condescending article that ignores the realities of life for many in the US ….
    At 389K a year, you still expect sympathy?

    1. Nobody expect sympathy for those making $389,000+. But people making $389,000 certainly don’t deserve to get attacked and vilified. I’d rather say thank you for paying so much in taxes that gets redistributed to others who have less.

      It’s OK to try and raise taxes on others if you don’t have to pay more yourselves. But as someone who has experienced racial discrimination before growing up in the south as a minority, I can unequivocally tell you that discrimination is NOT OK just because you aren’t being discriminated against.

      How about getting the skills and education to get those jobs? The internet and knowledge is essentially free now.

      1. Nobody needs to thank anyone for paying taxes: we all know the rules going in (or can look them up), and none us set our own salaries or our own tax rates (unless you’re a politician). It’s the nature of the beast, it’s the law, and it’s part of being a citizen in our great country.

        To feel entitled to a ‘thank you’ when you willingly work here, knowing full well what you’ll be taxed, is pretty obnoxious. That’s like people taking out 100+K for an out-of-state B.A., then complaining and wanting the debt forgiven. It might be even more obnoxious, since (if you’re making 400K) your life is probably much better than the ignorant indebted student’s. I’m sure that student would gladly take your job and salary off your hands and pay your taxes for you.

        1. I think saying “thank you” is a cheap and easy way to show appreciation. So, I say “thank you” to as many people as possible.

          A little acknowledgement goes a long way, and I’m supremely appreciative of those who support those who have less.

  59. The income is important but not the most important. The purchasing power shows the real thing.
    Someone can make $380,000/year and can still be poor. If fundamental needs like food, housing, school, transportation, costs are hundred of thousands/year, no matter how much you make, $3-400,000/year.
    There are out there people in other countries that they make only under $10,000/year and still have a better life than many of us here in US.
    So I would say that a system is fair, if everyone who works at least 40hours/week, gets a pay check enough to pay for good food, housing expenses(mortgage,rent, utilities), school,entertainment,transportation,hygiene,etc and have a little left for saving.
    I do not believe that a union electrician makes $150,000/year. Maybe in a speculative industry.
    Most of the engineers in US with a BS or MS degrees do not make that money.

    1. Fermi's Paradox

      That is just crazy speak Johnny! Those are extraneous examples. You’re asking us to believe that someone making close to $400K a year is poor? And your definition of “fair” is essentially saying the government should somehow ensure (through law or handouts) that virtually every need and then some is met, regardless of what occupation is chosen.

  60. There is one other group that pays no federal income tax: people who live off investment income, independent of age

    In addition to the standard deduction and personal exemption that allows low-income families to pay no tax (about $20k tax free for married filing jointly), if income comes from dividends and long term capital gains a family can earn another ~$70k a year tax free ($90k+ total)

    This post explains it fairly well:
    It seems Uncle Sam really wants people to retire early and live off investments

    We also shared our actual 2013 tax return, which can make it easier to see how the theory is applied in practice ($91,752 in AGI, $0 tax)

    If Congress is interested, I have a long list of recommendations to improve the tax system

    1. Fermi's Parodox

      You really should read the article carefully for one, it contradicts itself. And capital gains once realized are taxed, plain and simple (yes, at a lower rate “generally” than your marginal income tax rate, but not always). And if you think you’re going to NOT pay taxes by some maneuvering of investments into qualified dividends, etc., you need to look more closely. And moreover, the “tax free” investments generally have lower returns than taxed investments for the obvious reasons. What maters is your free cash return. There is no free lunch, or should I say it’s pretty difficult to find.

      1. Yeah? What is the contradiction?

        I’ve followed the recommendations in that post for the last 2 years and paid $0 in tax on AGI over $90k, while invested in the US stock market and matching returns of the S&P500.

        It seems like the lunch is free (and tax free too.) Turbo Tax agrees

        1. Fermi's Paradox

          Realize the gains as cash, you will pay tax, it’s pretty simple. As long as you do what most people do, even those who don’t read the article, and postpone the gain, you’re fine.

          1. Capital gains are taxable events, true. Yet when total income is such that the marginal rate is less than 25%, then the rate applied to long term capital gains is 0%.

            Certainly, following the path that most people do would result in no taxes today, but eventually those gains will be taxed. Postponed as you say. By harvesting the gains along the way, the net tax is zero, both today and in the future

            This is the result of the so-called Bush Tax Cuts and their addition to the permanent tax code as part of the American Tax Payer Relief Act of 2012

            The lunch is definitely free. Here is a concrete example:

            $44k in capital gain. $28k in dividends. $91k total AGI. $0 tax

  61. In my opinion, the only “Fair” tax system is one that is based on consumption, as opposed to income. This would eliminate the need for self reporting, and the majority of the IRS, as we already have a sales tax system established within every state. Therefore, the implementation of a “Federal Sales Tax” would be very simply integrated within the existing systems that are already in place today. This would allow for revenue to be generated from all who consume products within our county. Visitor, criminals, illegal aliens, businesses, individuals, you name it, they are all included as they all consume goods when within the United States. This would stop punishing income earners for earning and saving, while requiring everyone to participate in the tax program.

    Some may comment that we will then be punishing the poorest of the country because everyone must eat and it would be “unfair” to tax someone for buying food. In response to this I would suggest that we eliminate food staples from the “taxable” consumables, although in many states we are taxing food today. Sales Tax Free products would include necessary “staples” such as meat, eggs, milk, cereals, water, etc. but not unnecessary consumables or simply desired treats, such as soft drinks, coffees, candies, etc.

    Additionally, a higher rate could be charged for luxury items or so called “sin” products such as luxury automobiles and boats, or alcohol and tobacco…

    I would be interested in hearing others thought from this perspective.

    1. First and foremost, before we even think about fixing the tax system, we need to fix the SPENDING system. It we stop wasting money on STUPID thing, there would be plenty. Then, it’s a lot easier to fix the tax system when you get to let EVERYONE keep more of what they earn.

      It’s time to REQUIRE a real balanced budget. You enforce it by not allowing ANY government hiring, ANY pay increases for government employees (including step and seniority increases), NO new government programs or renewal of expiring ones, and Congress and the President (and their staffs) get a pay CUT of the same percentage that spending exceeds revenue.

    2. Fermi's Parodox

      Exactly Jon Gif, it’s simple common sense! And is an ethical methodology as apposed to the system of appealing to special interest groups we have today.

    3. It’s an interesting concept, but increasing prices and not taxing income has the potential to incentivize an economic stall. A system rewarding you for NOT spending is probably not the best way to foster our economy!

      It also hinders governments ability to coerce industries to invest in new technology (granted the free market should solve this on its own, but its governments job to act as the voice of the people and reward champions of issues like green energy and healthy/sanitary food technologies). Your concept might actually create the ‘cheaper is better’ mindset where price becomes the dictating factor in consumer purchasing–which is debilitating to otherwise healthy competition.

      Just my initial reaction to the concept.

      1. Fermi's Paradox

        Wow, that’s scary Rob. Perhaps learn a little more about how a market works. And by the way, if “green energy” were such a great thing it would (or will) stand on it’s own. And if it takes interest in it to create demand, go out and create that interest. Stop asking government to execute the will of a small minority (who think they know best when it comes to energy) over the desires of the majority. If you like green, fine, go buy it.

        1. The Salamander

          That the market will proactively solve our problems via supply and demand is a fantasy. There is a huge demand for the cure of cancer. Why doesnt the cure just get up and stand on it’s own two feet? Certainly there is a demand, no?

          1. Your example of cancer confuses me. Has the billions of dollars funneled into cancer research by the US government turned up a cure? Can I use that fact to say that the government solving problems is a myth?

            The free market wanted a better way to transport goods from China to the US. It created super freighters. The free market wanted a better way to use American cotton and the cotton gin came about. It wanted a cheaper way (compared to kerosene) to light up our homes and the electric light bulb was funded.

            Time and again a demand for something has created funding for it. Both public and private. With enough funding and time, humanity has again and again solved it’s problems.

            Here’s a question. Can you find me an example of something having a huge demand and getting no private sector funding?

            1. Once upon a time, there was market that could product agricultural goods at a very efficient and profitable rate, created wealth for many, and established a robust international trade network. It was called slavery!

              A tired point is that somehow the “market” has the solution to solve every problems, and the government is the killjoy that restricts “freedom.”

              I’ll thank the government for mandating car companies to put in seatbelts, food and drug testing, pollution laws that keep my rivers and air clean. Do they always maintain a fair balance, off course not, but neither does the market.

              You only need to look at China to see what a largely unregulated market looks like. You get your 10% annual growth, but you also don’t see the sky in cities like Shanghai and Beijing. Me, I’d rather see the sky.

    4. Working Forthe Mann

      You are an idiot. Use tax has been proven time and time again to be regressive. The poor spend most of their income on food, shelter, clothing, necessities. There is little savings, less home ownership.

  62. Richard Saunders

    The article starts off by talking about Averages which is very deceptive. It should be using the Median. The average income of 9 people who make a dollar and 1 person making a million is $100,000. The median income of those 10 people is 1.

    1. Fermi's Paradox

      Richard Saunders: The article looks at average rates by many income brackets, so the implications are much more telling than a simple median. It’s a very sound article and well founded. I’ve read quite a bit on the subject.

  63. Do you mind if I quote a couple of your articles as long as I provide credit
    and sources back to your website? My blog site is in the exact same area of interest as yours and my users would
    definitely benefit from some of the information you present here.

    Please let me know if this alright with you. Many thanks!

  64. FermisParadox

    Tom: the tired talk show theme is exactly what you are trying to get people to believe.

    The fact that it is a meme, continually broadcasted by so many doesn’t make it true. Go check the CBO website for what you are looking for (combined taxes), it’s out there. All Fed, State and local incomes taxes are progressive or at a minimum flat. Sales and transactional taxes are what they are, those with greater income spend more or have assets that are taxed more. So even at an “equivalent rate” they are higher (and of course, in absolute dollars, higher income earners pay much, much, more). Moreover, the lower income brackets not only pay fewer taxes (if at all on a net basis) but often receive direct dollar benefits (e.g., earned income tax credits) and a whole host of non-cash benefits those paying substantial taxes are not “entitled” to.

    Yours is a very old and unjustified argument.

  65. This is a tired talk show theme. Take a look at effective tax rates for all taxes combined, including state, local, sales etc. And you will find that most poor and middle class are paying a higher rate than the wealthy.

    Also note that this country has some of the highest measures of income and capital inequality of any wealthy country in the world and you’ll realize the poor aren’t doing so well and the rich are getting by just fine. I don’t think we need to increase taxes on the poor at this point.

    1. Fermi's Paradox

      Tom: the tired talk show theme is exactly what you are trying to get people to believe.

      The fact that it is a meme, continually broadcasted by so many doesn’t make it true. Go check the CBO website for what you are looking for (combined taxes), it’s out there. All Fed, State and local incomes taxes are progressive or at a minimum flat. Sales and transactional taxes are what they are, those with greater income spend more or have assets that are taxed more. So even at an “equivalent rate” they are higher (and of course, in absolute dollars, higher income earners pay much, much, more). Moreover, the lower income brackets not only pay fewer taxes (if at all on a net basis) but often receive direct dollar benefits (e.g., earned income tax credits) and a whole host of non-cash benefits those paying substantial taxes are not “entitled” to.

      Yours is a very old and unjustified argument.

  66. I worked for the IRS in data entry for awhile and I can personally attest that the wealthy are often paying less taxes. I hand entered and coded paper tax returns and was shocked how a family of 4 making 20-30k would frequently be paying less than someone making well over 100k. I can’t say how it happened because I was younger and didn’t really understand tax codes, but I was the one typing in the numbers and the “amount paid” by many, many wealthy taxpayers was frequently less than the poorer families. I remember distinctly my shock and outrage after I saw the pattern emerge.

    1. “I hand entered and coded paper tax returns and was shocked how a family of 4 making 20-30k would frequently be paying less than someone making well over 100k.”

      This is right, unless you think someone making over 100k should pay less? Why are you shocked?

      When you said rich paying less, I would assume you are saying in terms of effective tax rate, not the whole amount. The fact is the top 5% earners are contribution over 80% of tax revenue for the govt.

      1. Fermi's Paradox

        In reading her post, Deniece mentions she entered the “amount paid”, presumably accompanying the return she hand-entered. So it is not surprising that in some cases an earner with less AGI paid more than a higher earner simply because they did not withhold appropriately. The higher earner may have a tax consultant so they can maintain proper withholding, especially considering the higher dollar penalties they may pay vis-à-vis the lower income earner. After all, we are debating with a data entry clerk at the IRS.

    2. FermisParadox

      Deniece: all you have to do is go to the IRS website, there you can see the “effective” or average tax rate and amounts (actual dollars) filers pay for various income brackets. BOTH the effective rates and dollars paid GO UP with increasing income bracket. Of course, there are unique cases where you can compare individual filers and this is will not hold true, partly because our tax system is so complex. But on average (which is what we are talking about) higher income equals a higher bracket AND greater tax paid.

  67. Paul Liimatta

    I’m tired of hearing the ways to produce more revenue for the government when there’s so much waste reported and inappropriate funding in the 100s of billions along with IRS workers who owe billions in back taxes. It’s preposterous the effort in trying to raise any taxes before the waste is handled through a combination of law changes, policy, sending civil servants and bankers to prison for crimes that undermine our economy.

    All that money would probably add up to 500 billion at least, start there!

  68. Fermi's Paradox

    Again Tom, I have my suspicion that Eric’s post is not entirely accurate.

    Aside from that, the data FS provides is the data, from the IRS, it’s elsewhere in many places and easy to validate if readers care too. E.g. the top 1% paid on average $280,000 in Federal income taxes while the bottom 50% paid about 400 bucks. It’s all there.

    So if Eric is somehow suggesting that there is some kind of grand conspiracy out there wherein the wealthiest in our society are somehow escaping taxes (in significant numbers) and as such do not show up in the data… well, I wish someone would provide a little more proof (as apposed to some anecdotal example). I guess that’s the case with conspiracies, there’s little or no proof.

    A good exercise for everyone is to hang-out somewhere that successful people gather, say some bar in a very nice restaurant in a wealthy neighborhood. Then just politely ask people about themselves and how they became successful, they will be flattered. Then find a watering hole where you know people are not very “economically well off” (be careful of course). Ask the same questions, but do it ever so subtly as to not offend. Then just compare the answers.

    All of this is no mystery.

    1. Good tip. If more folks can be willing to open up their minds and look to see how wealthier people got to where they are, instead of just shoot them down for being lucky or whatever, I think more people will get wealthier!

      Get a mentor, listen, ask people who’ve been there, done that.

      1. Fermi's Paradox

        FS, thanks again for a well balanced and objective website on a subject (money and wealth) that can be so contentious.

        And much of the mystery, hysteria and misinformation about wealth creation is due to this false egalitarian ethic that permeates every aspect of our society today. Yes, everyone is entitled to equal opportunity, but that NEVER produces equal results and never will – simply because individual people are in fact different from one another and that leads to different outcomes (e.g., beliefs, ambition, willingness to take risk, preferences for certain life endeavors, culture, cognitive ability and so on).

        All too often people make certain life decisions, take certain paths in life, engage in certain behavior, don’t recognize they lack requisite traits, abilities, etc. all which ends up hindering their “success” or at least as they perceive it. They then blame “the system” or the successful or any number of externalities other than themselves. The reasoning goes: “if everybody is equal then anyone who has more must have obtained it at the expense of someone else or it is otherwise ill-gotten.”

    2. I agree, I here hear people say all the time the rich pay less in taxes, they use Warren Buffet as their example.

      I ask them to point me to the location in the tax code that the rate decreases. It does not. It never decreases. Then they state well he makes all his money on investment, and capital gains is lower, well yes, but its even with capital gains the rich pay more on capital gains.

      The fact is the press has done a great job of saying the rich are bad, corporations are bad. Maybe people should be upset with how the government spends the money they takes from people.

      1. Specifically, people who have a lot of investment income, long-term, reap huge benefits by only having to pay 28% Capital Gain Tax Rate, rather than the normal 35%+ rate.

        Also huge corporations can move to Ireland or other off-shore locations to enjoy tax benefits while still operating mostly in the US.

        1. Fermi's Paradox

          Jacob, simply check the IRS data, it belies what you say. In terms of income groups, each successive group tax payers with greater income pays a greater % of their income (regardless of source) in taxes (Top 1% > Top 5% > Top 10%, etc. in terms of income earning groups).

          And you are confusing marginal rates with average rates, you are comparing the top marginal income tax rate with a capital gains rate. It is more than likely for most their average tax rate is lower than the 28% you specify, that’s all that matters, really. That’s in the IRS data too.

          Moreover, stockholders own and are responsible for the company in all regards; the income, the cost, the profit AND for the taxes. The corporation also pays taxes on the stockholders behalf, so the combined tax on corporate “profit” or “returns to capital” is very large in this country.

          And as much as you would like to believe companies run from America to incorporate, the number is quite small by comparison.

          Lastly, even if your argument were true, common sense suggests that even the % difference you sight is so small that it in no way explains the differences in after-tax income.

      2. The top capital gain rate is around 23 percent. The capital gain rate for people in the 15 percent bracket is zero. A married couple who is living off investments can therefore take home around $75k and pay no taxes. A non married couple with head of household closer to 90 k if both have their own portfolios. If the married couple have itemized deductions and exemptions they could potentially take home close to 90k to 100k before paying any taxes. If this couple were running a business they could deduct their BMW lease payments, health care costs, and other benefits to help this couple have a break even business. Furthermore this small business can offer a 401k plan and Hsa plan to put away another 22k away tax free. This couple would be in the top 8 percent and pay no income tax. Super wealthy people won’t pay zero income tax, but those who rely on the capital gains rate will pay a lower effective tax than many middle class families. Furthermore wealthy investors pay zero dollars on the appreciation of their assets which is arguably income in a real sense. I hope this helps with the zero tax part…

    3. Eric the Viking

      After working our tails off for 20+ years my wife and I entered the top 1% in our early 40’s and recently at age 49 entered the the top 0.1%. You would never know by looking at us that we have an eight figure net worth. We have no boats, motorcycles, or fancy cars. My car doesn’t even have power seats. We know many other 1%er’s and I can attest that they all pay big taxes. We pay about 43% of our gross income every year in state and federal taxes. Add sales tax, FICA, medicare, and property taxes on top of that and about 50% of our income goes towards taxes. The real problem will be when wealthy couples like us step out of the work force a decade or more before normal retirement age because we are tired of working for the government 5-6 months out of the year. Serious tax reform is needed if this country is to survive another 200 years. I don’t mind paying my “fair share” but the top marginal of 51.4% that we currently pay on much of our income is too high. It is one of the major reasons for our decision to retire in the next couple years.

      1. I retired early partly due to high taxes as well.

        I’ve found that making $200,000-$250,000 a year is the ideal income for maximum happiness. Income is enough to do whatever you want, and you aren’t taxed to the point where you feel taken advantage of.

      2. Please excuse me if I don’t feel a bit sorry for you or your 8 figure income. How much money does one actually NEED?

        1. There is a HUGE difference between an 8 figure NET WORTH (which is what was stated) and an 8 figure INCOME to which you alluded.

        2. The answer to that question is unique to each person. In a free market system how can anyone define the “NEED” for someone else regarding finances / income. The tone of your comments has the odor of socialism, and that, my friend, is not a good path to financial freedom.

      3. What do you do with your money? Your take home is over 500k a year and you have no big material items. You either make lousy investments or like to sit on money and whine about paying taxes. I am in the same situation and don’t spend like crazy yet enjoy life. Paying taxes over 50% is fine and def prefer to keep working and paying vs no longer bringing in 500k a year.

        1. Eric the Viking

          We are retired now. We have 3 beautiful homes that we enjoy and we travel extensively. I splurged on a couple boats in the last year and we spend much of our time on the water when we are not traveling.

  69. Unless your business lost a boatload of money earlier and you have tons of deferred tax credits that are somehow still operational I can’t see you being taxed 0 all the time.

    However, with “loopholes” and clever tricks to transfer wealth like real estate appreciation, life insurance, or maybe out right entering a legal grey/black area that got banks like CS in trouble you can definitely minimize your tax bill to far below the maximum 40% bracket for top earners. Its a bit harder to get below the 15% capital gains but I’ve read you can do stuff like wait till you die to pass appreciated stock to your heirs so its gets a markup without being taxed. Since I’m not in any way a financial advisor or estate planner I’m sure there’s plenty of other small things you can do that add up.

    For most Americans, these things are just not worth it as you’d have to actually hire a good financial advisor/ estate planner (most of whom charge sizable fees and make 6 figures + anually). But if I ever get rich enough and haven’t succeeded in lobbying the UN to impose a 75%+ wealth tax on the world and rigorously prosecute capital flight for tax avoidance purposes, I’m definitely taking advantage of as many of these loopholes as I can.

    1. It’s interesting you say that Tom, because I’m currently consulting with Personal Capital, a digital wealth manager who employee Registered Investment Advisors to help with estate planning, investing, and so forth. Their highest fee is 0.95% on assets over $100,000 a year, and goes down from there.

    2. If someone holds stock till death and extremely wealthy the fair market value of the stock is included in the estate of the deceased. Yes the family will get a step-up in the value of the stock, but could be taxed in the estate if over the gift/estate tax exemption amount. Estate tax is 40% currently, so yeah there’s that…

      Good estate planning will contribute that to a family partnership or another entity and gift the partnership interest at a discounted rate prior to estate issues arising.

      1. stock for someone “extremely wealthy” would likely be moved into an irrevocable trust along with any other assets subject to estate tax (i.e. real estate/personal property, etc.) during their estate planning.

    3. Jonathan SCHAEFER

      You BETCHA! And kudos to YOU, Sir, for being honest. I can NEVER get angry at someone who USES the system the WAY it was intended. But, until the electorate is given HONEST numbers, we can NEVER realize just how much (or how LITTLE) money is actually being paid by the top 1….or even 2%. I want to see HOUSEHOLD INCOME become the measuring stick. How much did you TAKE IN this year? From ALL sources. And how much did you receive in refunds? The remainder is how much you actually paid. That, my friend, is the only honest picture, from which we can judge, whether people are paying their fair share of TAXES. In the END, the ONLY fair tax system is one where the household income is computed with the SAME percentage for everyone. No deductions. What a DREAM (one that will never become reality).

    4. That kind of thinking is what is saving the rich! We have GOT to stop thinking they need to pay such ridiculous rates. Many pay very little actual cash. The thing that has to happen is the rate structure has got to change. That is the only way to insure everyone pays SOMETHING. If every taxable entity paid, say, 7-8%, with NO deductions, the government would have more money than they could spend! Flat tax rate, no deductions. If you WANT to spend your money, because you have more of it, it will help the overall economy. But no more, where people with billions, get to keep all of it because they spend it correctly. That’s bullshit.

      1. Fermi's Parados

        And your 7-8% would on average be a tax break to the 1% and would be a tax increase to over 50% of people who file tax returns. Just check the IRS website before making unfounded remarks about how much people actually pay in taxes. And it is all based income, not sure what the remark above is about “household income” is. That is effectively what the tax is based on (e.g., married filing jointly).

  70. Hi Sam,

    My thoughts is that if a person who is 80 years old and has $1 million dollars compared to someone who is 30 years old and has $1 million dollars has different worth. Someone who is 30 and has that much money has the most important asset in the world, TIME, to build on that wealth.

    An old wisdom insight is that most 80 year old people would trade their $1 million to be 30 years old again.

    Blair

    Professorsavings.com

  71. Beware, beware jumping to political conclusions about the relative tax contributions of money classes in the US to the society at large. First off, I offer me as an example of just how misleading things can be:

    I am probably in the peak years of my income generation, but I funnel it through a business. Between work and investment appreciation my net worth increases about $30k/month. My total federal+state+local income taxes are zero. They have been for years, and will continue to be zero for years. Moreover, inheritance tax planning will likely hide my assets for two more generations. In 70 years my grandchildren will pay a hefty income tax that will buff the charts like the one in this article, but the years of untaxed compounding will be hidden. Shall we use 10x appreciation ?

    Don’t kid yourselves, folks. Well off people hide massive amounts of money from the AGI.

      1. It’s because of his ‘business expense’ when he file for tax return. It’s a loophole that all the rich exploited because the tax regulations are create by the rich. :)

        1. Bull.

          Show me how your business makes money and does not pay taxes. What type of legal entity is it?

          How do you calculate your net worth?

            1. Fermi's Paradox

              That’s an idiotic statement Jay, have you bothered to ever check one of their Annual Reports? Or are you going to say the report is a lie? You would also know that lying in them is a Federal crime. Of course, there is no punishment when the Huffington Post does it though.

            2. Fermi, whoever THAT is, is obviously aghast at the idea he has been TAKEN by what he THOUGHT was a fair system. I always figured the system was NOT what it’s presented to be, but when I was informed that this guy was gonna pay way less than I was paying (his income HAD to be enough to pay a mortgage on a home worth 7 figures, and a car that cost him 6 figures, new), because his TAXABLE INCOME was way less than mine, I realized I was right all these years.

          1. Jonathan SCHAEFER

            LOL! If you own a business, there are a myriad of ways to “hide” income, legally. Can you explain how a man, a podiatrist, with three offices in California, could POSSIBLY make enough money to afford a home in a gated community and a 4 year old Mercedes, when his “taxable income” was less than myself, who worked for an auto company and was an hourly employee? America (those who are in the middle 20%) needs to wake up. Things are NOT FAIR. We need to abandon our idea of a “progressive” tax system, and adopt a FLAT TAX, with NO deductions and tax everyone on their HOUSEHOLD INCOME!

            1. Fermi's Parados

              FS above asked how someone doesn’t pay any taxes (presumably without breaking the law, after all, if you are willing to break the law anything is possible, including bank robbery).

              No one has provided anything substantive. FS sounds like he understands the tax code very well, hence his poignant question. Those who make more not only pay more but pay at a higher rate. Yes, there are “business expenses” that are technically deductible depending on what kind of business entity you have and the nature of the expense. But there are strict rules around that, it only goes so far. I am very familiar with them.

              Please get your facts straight.

            2. Really NOT fair. 10% of 20K is 2 grand. Quite a chunk out of 2o grand.

              10% of 100 grand, not such a big chunk. Flat tax is just plain unfair.

              1. 10% of $100K is $10,000 in taxes, or 5X more than $2K. What’s wrong with that?

                A flat tax ABOVE a minimum income level is what’s fair. I wouldn’t expect a flat tax for someone making below poverty wages at all. Let’s called it flat tax per individual for every dollar over $25,000.

            3. Agree 100%! Loopholes must be filled and everybody should pay their relative fair share. But that is not enough, in a wealthy country like ours the basic needs of all should be secure. The ten top earring countries mentioned give a lot more security to their citizens then we do, from end to beginning, nursing homes are heavily subsidized if not free, so is medical care, education, and infant care. In our “civilized” country these services command a hefty price unattainable to most, whereas in ALL truly civilized countries basic needs are taken for granted, and so they must be to level the playing field. One cannot thrive with a Damocles sword hanging over his head. Once the playing field is level and the sword seethed then entrepreneurship and hard work (definitely more then 40hrs a week, at least in the beginning) will have a much better chance at rewarding the applicants.

        2. Not really a comment on your letter but I do not see how to get to write a letter without “replying” > In any case I am not interested in AGI I am interested in total income. AGI is a another tax haven If I earn $200,000 in tax free bonds and pay no taxes I still have about $4,000 a week to live on. If I have no deductions, family of 4 and earn 26,000 I also (according to this article pay no taxes..(about $400 a week) so who is better off? Duh…never use AGI in any comparison, it is a sure sign you are rich.

      2. Jay @ Thinking Wealthy

        Partnerships are beautiful creatures my friend! Hire a tax lawyer. It’s worth it in the end.

    1. Fermi's Paradox

      I doubt this is a real post, particularly knowing something about the tax code and the statistics in question.

      Please tell us a little how you are able shield such income, as you say it’s not illegal.

      Or is it essentially real estate appreciation that is adding to your net worth (as apposed to cash income)?

    2. What nonsense. You’re anonymous. Tell us how you do this. You are full of it.

      The sad part is, people hear this kind of thing and they believe it. Guarantee he can’t tell us how he does this, because he doesn’t.

      1. Fermi's Paradox

        That’s a very important point Bill Richards (not to keep continuing this thread but it provokes thinking). I read a study a couple years ago, I think it was done by an Administration or the CBO, but it found roughly 1/2 of money income from those under the official poverty line is NOT reported. They determined this and other findings through direct interview of a large sample, not the typical meta-data analysis of broad reported statistics. Meaning this fact will not come from IRS data for example.

        And it makes perfect sense as well (in case someone wants to raise the BS flag). They not only likely have jobs where this is more frequently the case (e.g., cash work, self employed or working for an individual or small business that can more easily escape reporting requirements), BUT they are motivated NOT to report themselves. By doing so they are able to obtain or maintain greater benefits from the state. You can hardly blame them, they are acting rationally (perhaps not morally).

    3. Semper Fidelis

      This is absolutely true. I’ve done bookkeeping and seen it many times. It is pretty easy to legally expense 100% of profit from a business, leaving nothing to tax. I’ve worked for three or four small businesses that do this. It’s really quite simple and easy to do.

      First, register all your vehicles as company vehicles and expense the cost of those vehicles, plus all gasoline and maintenance costs; Expense all health insurance costs, co-pays, and deductibles; Expense all travel and entertaining that has anything to do with your business or is done with a client or employee; Expense all payroll and company retirement contributions (make sure to put the maximum in your own, so you can write off the entire $53,000 as a payroll expense, and make sure that your spouse and children are ’employed’ so you can contribute up to $53,000 to their plans, tax free, as well); Expense any other items that are related to your business, including newspaper subscriptions, charitable contributions or advertising, continuing education expenses, city, state or federal licenses, fees or requirements, all telephone and internet service (including personal phones and computers, if you use them to communicate with customers or vendors); Expense home office space from your mortgage; Expense any security services related to business done at home or at business location; Expense customer and employee ‘gifts’… I’m sure there are more, but those are the main ones.

      In a larger business, taking no salary whatsoever (meaning no earned income to tax) and taking instead ‘deferred gains’ or stock options puts even $25,000,000 into the lowest capital gains tier of 15% (meaning the exact same percentage of tax is due for the twenty five million dollars as an earned income (W-2 or 1099) of less than $37,400 in 2015.

    4. They would get buried in an IRS audit. The expenses must be business related. As a bookkeeper you should turn these guys into the IRS and get the 10% finders fee.

      1. Wouldn’t be worth it. The expenses he lists are legit, but only the portion directly related to business. Which means you have to have records of what trips were for business, what were not. But, if you want to go to Hawaii for a vacation, just make sure you attend a conference there – and deduct the airfare, hotel, meals, etc. For an individual, unreimbursed business expenses aren’t deductible until you reach a certain amount – then they are only deductible after that point. If you own a business, nearly every dollar of the Hawaii trip is deductible. No minimum necessary.

        But, there are tax incentives against working for yourself, as well. For example, you must pay the self-employed portion of your payroll tax – which would be covered by an employer. My daughter baby-sat last summer to earn money for college. She made less than $800, but had to file a Schedule C (self-employment) and pay the SE tax. She didn’t pay Federal or State tax, but there is no minimum on the amount you earn before you have to pay SE tax.

  72. RealDealExpert

    Wow this article is moronic. ‘Work more than 40hrs, anyone can do it!” What a joke.

    1. Please explain why you think working more than 40 hours a week to get ahead is moronic. 40 hours is the average work hours for Americans. If you work more than average, what do you think happens?

        1. ….”become better than average”…how do you propose that a person become that “better than average” person when there are not (and history proves never has been) an adequate number of jobs to provide the necessities required to live independently in our society?

          1. Fermi's Paradox

            Madeline, your comment makes you sound like a crazy person. You are not serious are you?

          2. “… there are not…adequate number of jobs to provide the necessities required to live independently…”

            Maybe Madeline meant: there aren’t enough (adequate) paying jobs which allows a single person to live independently reasonably. In the average urban areas, the cost of living still outpaces minimum wage rates which allows this.

            1. And that has always been the case in large cities. That’s why many people have roommates early on in their career, or rent rooms, or…

              People didn’t just expect to get any old job and be living the high life back in the day. Now we have all these luxuries that many consider necessities, and suddenly they complain that they can’t afford the actual necessities.

        1. AllWorkAndNoPlayMakesJillADullGirl

          I agree, what kind of a life is it if you’re working more than half of your waking hours through the week? Making all that money just to come home and go to bed? I understand that some people are workaholics and can’t stand not being busy, but all work and no play drives most people crazy. You have to have free time to enjoy outside activities.

          1. People who work 40 hrs a week don’t even work 25% of the hours in the week…. just saying. You could work 80 hours a week and still not even work half the week.

            1. I just wanted to say sleep is required in humans. The number of waking hours in a week (minus 8 hours of sleep times seven days a week) is 112 hours. 40 hours ÷ 112 = 35.7% of waking hours or pretty much 35.7% of your life. 80 hours would be 71%. Just saying.

          2. right. productivity is yet another issue.

            but there are still a lot of people who consciously choose to maintain 2 or more regular paying jobs – just to feel “comfortable” financially.

            though there are a lot of job openings, filling them is a challenge as well; as employers can’t find applicants with the skills needed (to be productive immediately). but that also highlights the fact that companies today are less-likely to want to train new un-skilled staff & rather over-load existing staff with the increasing demands.

          3. In the words or Ari Gold: “9 to 5, yes I remember my first part time job”. If you think you will get to $250K by working 9-5, then please do not complain when you are in your 40’s and still making the average income

            1. Hear, hear. If I could make $250k working 9 to 5? lol I would try to make $400k for 60+ a week. I wouldn’t know what to do with myself if I only worked 40 a week. I would feel lazy.

          4. If you will go out into the economy and do for two years what other people won’t do, you will be able to do for the rest of your life what other people cannot do.

      1. Let’s thank the rich? Seriously the wealth gap is greater than it ever has been. I’m glad my work doesn’t want me to work more than 40 hours a week because I work my ass off in those 40. If you want to get ahead you have to be motivated and willing to spend time outside of work learning new skills though. I spent a lot of my free time learning programming and computer science and now I am lead data programmer at my print company.

        1. One of the main reasons why the gap between the rich and poor is rising is because the education requirements for even the most mediocre jobs are rising and the poor are either unable to obtain the needed education or they don’t wish to go into debt to get one. But, I can’t blame this on the wealthy, the competition for jobs is what drives up the requirements; I hate to say it, but people just have to compete harder nowadays than ever before, every generation from now on will have it harder than the one before, especially if you are in the lower tax brackets.

          The wealthy pay massive amounts of taxes and it’s really the responsibility of the government to make sure it goes to the right places; judging from observation, it is not doing the greatest job.

          1. You are right about government responsibility. I lived in a city where artist could be paid by the government to paint horses and drains in the city.

            Instead of government grant money used for this it should have been part of a course curriculum for an art degree at the local University.

            There are so many government funded programs that waste money this way,

            1. Dumbest remark I have ever heard. If you work as an artist you eventually have to get paid for some work, be it from the private or public center. What is the point of sending more artists through college if there are no jobs for them once they are finished? And, art is one of the few occupations that people can learn on their own if they are blessed with talent, ingenuity and work hard.

            2. sunshine326

              I only see one problem with your comment. The competition for jobs is due to the fact that more individuals have undergraduate degrees because of for profit and online schools. A bachelor’s degree doesn’t mean the same as it used to because of the ease that many programs have made it to earn one.

          2. larry flescher

            I rent apartments in a poorer respectable area of Milwaukee. Now college grads in many fields in their thirties are finding they are delivering pizzas and waiting well into their thirties. bright, well trained people working two jobs, having trouble getting by.

            30 hours makes a better work week, but these people are working long hours and unable to live independently. Experience has taught me.

        2. Forget about gaps. Grind it out and earn what you keep. When you do that, gaps are going to show up. Not everyone has your hustle. This is a good thing. Don’t fault them for it. Be comfortable with your place in the world. If you were going to be the ultimate billionaire you would’ve been born that way.

      2. I really don’t like your suggestion that people should work 60 hours a week, or any more than 40 for that matter. If one loves the work they do, then we do more of it and chances are make no more for the additional time (salaried). To suggest that American workers compete with the slave wages of China, or Viet Nam – I think you’ve got it all wrong. Corps. should not be free to seek slave labor in other countries. And we should be pushing for an international minimum wage as well. Your suggestion is just work for money, no family, no creative outlets, walks in the park – just work to compete with low wage countries so big corporations’ CEOs can get richer. I’d like to see us live like they do in Denmark.

        1. Europe is the best! I’ve seen the future, and it looks so bright.

          I’ve also been hustling seeing how life is like driving for Uber recently. Very eye-opening! Check out both posts.

          I’ve consistently worked over 60 hours a week for 16 years in a row. If the average person works 40 hours a week, then I’ve been able to use 16,640 more hours during this time period to earn more and create more. Working 50% more for 13 years is why I was able to exit the work force at 34.5 and just write on Financial Samurai for a living.

          Choose your destiny!

          1. There’s two parts. Working hard, but also having a job that pays well. It’s pretty tough to get ahead on minimum wage. It seems likely that the uneducated will be squeezed more and more as they compete with overseas labor and automation.

          2. Absolutely. GOOD hustle. Thing is…before you had your game tight, think back. When you were grinding it out for little to no compensation did you EVER in your wildest dreams think you would get to the place you are?

            I didn’t. One day I just thought…I need to do something. This isn’t working. I have got to step up my game. Then I started looking for ways…

            1. Love it. To get where I am I only had to be a janitor at night and pick up dead bodies for a mortuary 24/7, all while securing bachelors degrees in business and political science during the day. It took me 7 years. No assistance, and no complaints on my part while I watched my contempories piss away the dollars given to them to go to school. I now pay more than 10x the average income in the US in taxes alone.

              This is not to toot my horn. It is only to say that anything is possible if you work at it. I realize there are physical and other limitations that hinder many. That is what the system is for. All I know is that hard work and gratefulness goes a long way. I also know that the entitled mindset in the millennials that I interview regularly is sickening.

          3. Terrific, and for those that think getting an education is too expensive, please quantify the cost of ignorance.

            1. There is a difference between a degree and an education.

              And many do great without a degree. I know a heating/AC tech who just retired at age 60 with an annualincome of $150,000 plus medical including dental and vision.

        2. If you do not want to work hard, I suppose you should be happy what you got and do not talk about fairness when you see others are way ahead of you in terms of wealth.
          I was on unemployed not that long ago, I enoughed work 40 hours a week and think absolutely nothing after work. I lost my job, things turned around. I made at least 3 times my salary at my old job, and it keeps growing. But I have worked about 10 to 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. My daughter grows up on her own and she is the best student in her high school.
          You can not get everything on your side. You get something and you may lose the other. Pick what you want.

        3. Then move to Denmark. If you want to get ahead, you must either win the lottery or work more than 40 hours a week. If you don’t want to, that is your choice, but that decision means that you don’t get the new car, the iPhone or the new house. If you expect those things, then expect to work more than 40 hours a week.

        4. Denmark? You mean the country where people can not afford to buy a car (that’s why they ride bicycles not by choose or the care for nature) of not to talk about largest depression numbers and suicide in the world. So before having opinions lets spent time on education to see if thoughts wished really match with reality. As far as earlier comments, i am a first generation immigrant who didn’t even speak a word of English, didn’t have a place to stay a job or knew people or have grants scholarships for education. I made it! Yes it took much more than 40 hours to be exact 120 hours a week an 80 hours min. while in college full time. So it is still very possible only the person should have the desire to want to get out of poverty. I am proud to say i went from bottom 1% to top 1% in a matter of 20 years. Yes it takes time a lot of hard work but American dream still exist today! Please don’t blame this that, anyone can choose to educate themselves and make this happen. If you want to college bad enough yes you can with loans, it will require you to work jobs during but it is very possible! Oh in the meanwhile i took care of older parents and a younger sister whom i also helped and they did not received ANY government benefits.

      3. I agree with the article. I an an auto mechanic, I work a little over fifty hours a week and make just under thirty thousand, which in my area is actually a good wage. I used to think that the rich should pay more, but in the last year ice actually come to realize that they pay the majority of everything. I don’t think that working more hours in necessarily feasible for everyone. But more than forty is not a sacrifice when you want to earn more. The only reason that I an where I am now is because I spent a few years working sixty or so hours a week at crappy jobs. I used to work twenty something, but at that time I was practically homeless. I feel like for the majority of people in my situation it is the result of poor choices made in the past. I know that’s why I’m in the situation that I’m in.

        1. As a small business owner. I would highly recommend starting your own business. In fact I would turn the whole business model of auto service on its head and be mobile without a shop. Then you could service people’s cars at their house. That way you could perform routine maintenance and diagnosis at their house. That would be a great time saver for a lot of people.

      4. I can tell you what is wrong with working more than forty hours a week.

        1, The family falls apart because of time and stress.
        2, It only increases the drive for a drone population,
        3, You mind body and spirit weren’t meant to do this. You will break down your body before your time,go crazy, drive others crazy and perpetuate the myth that you can pursue happiness via over work.

        Why do I think this? I am living proof. I thought I could be wonder woman. I went through two marriages, and now my health has failed, and all before fifty five.

        Young people consider yourself warned.

        1. Your statement is more of the problems with today’s society. In the thirties and the forties people work more than 40 hours a week. Although one person was the bread winner of the house, generally. And the amounts of divorce back then in households was miniscule compared to today

          1. Wendy D. Smith

            The amount of divorce has increased dramatically for many reasons, but your implication that a single-income earner in the household was somehow better is not really factual or even comparable with today’s global economic reality. Divorce was lower in the early twentieth century (and before) for a myriad of reasons, one of which was complete and utter dependency on that single-income earner by the other members in the family, with little or no laws in place to protect those dependents in the event of divorce.

      5. A lot of companies won’t let you do more than 40. If you do work more than 40 by getting multiple jobs they start to butt heads. The idea that all you have to do to be successful is MOVE somewhere.

        Well I hope you don’t own anything, because moving across the country is expensive. I also hope you have a year’s worth of wages, because you’re going to need it while you find work, pay for your security deposit, adjust to the higher costs of living…

        Then you’re gonna end up running out of places for people in San Fran to live…

        Higher wages equals more spending power. More spending power means more economic freedom more economic freedom means the ability to support more small businesses.

        The only way for there to be a healthy thriving economy is for the BOTTOM to be able to help pay for innovation. You can’t just expect a bunch of angel investors and assholes to create every job in the country.

        The blog writer is probably the dumbest person I’ve heard arguments from in a while, and fact of the matter is I spend too much time reading Youtube comments. That’s a low bar.

    2. @RealDealExpert: and yet this recommendation makes lots of of sense. The one way I personally found to get ahead is to run my side gig in addition to my day job. When all is said and done, I easily work 60+ hours a week, and from a financial perspective it is worth it: I have additional income, and it is diversified. If I ever get fired from my day job, I now have a backup.

      But, yes, there is some time sacrifice to be made here!

      1. Jaret Grimsley

        It depends how much you make an hour. I’m 16 and worked at a summercamp last summer. I was making $132 a week, working 72 hours a week, five days a week, and making about $1.80 a hour. So I was obviously working more than the average person but making way less.

    3. These comments are hilarious. “History proves that there aren’t enough jobs”, working more than 40 hours a week is “moronic”. Apparently I bucked history in a moronic fashion :)

    4. How do you earn 1600 a month at mcdonalds? At 7.25 an hour you would have to work 60 hours a week. To earn that. There are no McDonald that hires anyone for more then 26-30 because after that you are to earn 401k health insurance other benefits. No mcdonalds or even Walmart for that matter does that. Your lucky to earn 60 hours for two weeks.

    5. i find it disconcerting that half the work force makes less than 33,000 a month. also he says to move to san francisco where the action is but the average 1 bedroom apartment in the bay area is $2,230 a monthi find it disconcerting that half the work force makes less than 33,000 a month. also he says to move to san francisco where the action is but the average 1 bedroom apartment in the bay area is $2,235 a month so there goes around $26,808 of your earnings just for rent right there. lets hope you dont need food or insurance or god forbid want to raise a family.

      1. 33000 a Month??? I hope you meant 3300 because 33000 a month is 396,000 a year. Which would put you in the top 2%…

        Please verify month to year as in 33000 a year versus 33000 a month.

      2. If you want to raise a family, you better make 3-5x your current expenses – that might mean making sacrifices — BEFORE YOU START to raise a family. That is – if you want to be responsible to your kids by SETTING AN EXAMPLE. No excuses. I paid for school myself, took loans, took RISK, and worked 2 jobs at a time and going to college to get where I am now – making 90k/yr working 32 hours a week. I wasn’t going to start having kids or even think of raising a family when I was making $9/hour. Making dumb / idiot decisions and not thinking of your future FIRST – you’ll deserve what you get because you reap what you sow – btw – it’s never too late to learn skills that employers will GLADLY PAY YOU WELL FOR.

        If 50% of people are making crap money, all you have to do is STAND OUT from 1 other person – and you will get paid more for it. Btw, you need to sell yourself and believe you are worth A LOT more than what you are currently getting paid.

        Some of my friends were working 40 hours a week while still in HIGH SCHOOL – because they were determined to become doctors and DOING WHATEVER IT TAKES.

        I just don’t have any more empathy for broke people that had kids without thinking of the future they can provide for them.

    6. Robert Garber

      Yes, sentences like this made me think this was a satirical site: “If you are in the bottom 50% of Americans who earn less than $33,048 a year, know that you can earn more if you want to. Half the battle is just moving to a vibrant location such as the San Francisco Bay Area where billions of dollars are flowing in due to technology innovation.”

      It really doesn’t get more delusional and smug than this!

        1. Yeah uber is great until you add costs ($1.00 per mile in Los Angeles, California, Check Auto Club stats) and taxes! Working 60+ hours a week destroys family’s and friendships. Many Europeans work way less hours than Americans and are more productive and happy (Germans for example).

        2. The Libertarian Dictator

          This entire article is a load of hogwash. How are you supposed to drive for Uber when you can’t afford a car?

          I work 24 hours a week, 4 x 6 hours days from home. I make enough money to live, but I can’t afford to get $36,000 for Implants that I need because I have 5 teeth missing.

          You seem to forget that some industries like mine (programming) have to compete with the entire world.

          I do work more than 24 hours a week for my own business, but so far I make about $10 every 3 months because open source doesn’t pay very well.

          I hope you all choke on your caviar.

  73. Why is the Police Chief getting paid 320,000 USD a year and such a large pension….? When a 8% return on a municipal retirement bond is close to impossible to negotiate? Deprression with infrastructure? ??

  74. I’d be interested in seeing the breakdown of the one percent, like income differences between the .1 percent and .01 percent for example. Any recommendations on where to find this information?

  75. James McCarter

    It’s very surprising to find out that I’m in the top 5% of wage earners. I know that I do pay an exorbarant amount of taxes per year (26,000.00). Even though I’m making a lot more than most americans, I still rent a house and drive two vehicles that have over 100,000 miles on them. I’m a trucking company owner operator with just one truck that me and my wife operate. We travel about 5,000 miles per week at a rate of 1.52 per mile. That’s 7,600 weekly less expenses for fuel which is usually (depending on the road and weather) about 2,500 weekly. That leaves 5,100.00 weekly to operate and maintain the truck which costs on average about $150.00 per week.
    The reason I’m posting this is because I see all these big houses and folks driving these big cars and I wonder what it is that they do for a living to be able to afford all of that….. Maybe I just don’t know how to manage money??

  76. Having spent some time assisting people with lower incomes with completing their taxes, I have first hand knowledge that people making <20,000 a year are PAID money they have not paid into the tax system according to how many children they have. Effectively we have incentivized people with lower incomes to continue to have children. My family decided to have only two children in anticipation of assisting them with college and a start in life, and are now the new minority. The mass majority is voting to increase taxes on anyone who makes over 250,000, effectively picking our pockets.
    Personally, I would like to know how much of my 60-80 hour work week you would like to share in.
    I don't even want to increase anyone's taxes – but could you please stop giving the money I pay in to people just because they can't/won't find a condom simply because they know the government will help pay for their children with my tax dollars?

    1. Interesting insight! Pretty neat the government incentivizes lower income folks to have kids and cuts off child subsidies for those making over a certain amount.

      The other way to look at it is this way: Maybe having kids isn’t so expensive? If a family of 5 can live off $40,000 a year, then obviously kids are not that expensive, or at least not the $500,000 price tags from 1-18 that some studies report.

  77. And insofar as thanking the rich for paying more taxes, considering 90% of all wealth accrued over the past two decades have gone to the top 1/10 of 1%, and they got two tax cuts over the past decade under W, and that capital gains gets taxed at half the rate of labor, I’m not entirely sure what we are thanking them for.

    That they bribed congress for special loopholes and treatment so all their good fortunes get taxed at a lower rate? When they have garnered most of the gains that labor catalyzes? I’m part of the top 4% and I find that thought repugnant. Thanking the top 200 families or the top 1/10 of 1% of this country for hoarding wealth, see the Fortune 500 hoarding 1.5 trillion cash on their balance sheets as exhibit 1, and the fact that tax cuts received by rich were invested overseas for highest returns, infuriates me.

    The poor pay payroll and sales tax that is terribly regressive. Thanking the poor for paying such a regressive rate, and their own way, while leaving the Paris Hiltons of the world nice loops like the inheritance tax exemptions is an insult to talent and meritocracy everywhere.

    1. ” the fact that tax cuts received by rich were invested overseas for highest returns”

      The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Bring this down to 0% and just tax capital gains at ordinary tax rates and you would see far more investing here.

      And yes, the “rich” (including you in the top 4%) have received tax cuts but as a % of total taxes, the “rich” are paying more now than when Clinton left office.

  78. Govt waste comes in two big forms. Defense and healthcare. Medicare’s 2% administrative overhead beats out any private insurer. And until healthcare reform happened, and healthcare costs stopped rising double digits for two years in a row now, that was the singular biggest driver of public and private debt in this country. And of course defense. Post 9/11 we doubled the defense budget. To catch a few hundred cavemen bombers in hiding.

    Everything else is chump change. Blaming the powerless and poorest among us for the economic sins of the wealthy (healthcare and military industrial complex) is just misplaced puritanism writ large.

  79. The point with lowering tax raises results in increased revenue is not entirely true. A better estimate of the benefit of tax cuts/increases is to look at tax revenue compared to the GDP.

    Look at this ratio over the last 30 years.

  80. Do you realize you just took Mitt Romney’s right vote away from him? When’s the last time Mitt had a job? And we can start taking away people’s right to vote right after we take away the right to keep and bear arms.

  81. Facts that the GOP and the wealthy don’t want us to Know. 1) The last time marginal tax rates on the wealthy where this low was right before the great depression and 2) the top 1% now earn over 23% of the total U.S. Income. The last time it was that high was again 1928 right before the great depression- It was less then 10% during the 50’s and sixties. — Scary stuff huh? They also had the predecessor to the TeaParty (financed by billionaire Koch Bro.) back then called the Liberty league (Financed by JP Morgan). Backed Right Wing Anti Tax Anti government Politicians. Published a Newsletter and said all the same things–blaming the poor and unemployed for the weak economy. They self destructed (got close to being Tried for Treason) and alleged to have made a deal to stay out of Jail to stop blocking FDR’s programs and disappeared until reincarnated as the Teaparty. FIX THE TAX CODE AND GET AMERICANS BACK TO WORK. pass it on. Check out the facts and Pass this on to everyone. Why don’t they take a look at the top .5%.

  82. Waw, those are some really impressive figures. There are countries where they would work more than 10 years to earn how much others are doing in one week….

  83. I earn a decent salary and do not mind paying my taxes. I’m grateful for my opportunities but what I do have a problem is the manner in which our government wastes my money. It leads me to want to live elsewhere. There’s no insurance or security these days and that’s scary even if you make a lot of money.

  84. Greg Schmidt

    My address is not to be passed on please.
    I’m not smart enough to figure this out, but I was curious if that instead of a national & state income tax, we instead did away with state sales tax and just charged a 10% national sales tax on everything, except food and medicines. Can you somehow estimate what would be brought in and distributed to the states and feds? This tax would be paid by everyone, from kids buying an ice cream cone, to seniors buying a pair of stretch socks. How much would hit the treasury? We maybe even be able to eliminate some of the greed. And we could probably eliminate the IRS and all of those employees. More savings.

  85. Reading these posts is frustrating….
    Some readers post on here where someone paid the same percentage as they did on their taxes and they were livid. I find that comical. Warren Buffet was said to pay the same percentage as his secretary but the difference is he paid 7 MILLION DOLLARS in taxes people. Paying the same PERCENTAGE doesn’t mean your paying the same amount. It only represented 17.4% of his income but it was certainly a lot more money than they were paying in. Why should those that make more pay a higher PERCENTAGE. For God’s sake the man paid in 7 million dollars. Maybe get rid of tax breaks. But socialism doesn’t work look around at all the other countries. Warren Buffet is paying his share and quite a few more peoples share. It’s big government spending. Did anyone pay attention that the pay raises that were approved by President Obama. I’m sorry I didn’t realize our Government officials were falling on hard times and needed pay raises at this time. If anything didn’t they need to cinch their belts in considering the massive debt every child born in America inherits. With the economy and unemployment and Government spending out of control it just goes to show how out of touch they are with the American people and who they are supposed to represent. It shouldn’t be me and you against each other it should be all of us demanding more and better from our government.

    I think where ever a person is they look at how it affects them and looks no further with their argument and sometimes without realizing it they could quite possibly be arguing the same point. As a wife of a business owner it amazes me when people say ” Yeah we need health care…businesses should provide it. Well in our business if we provide it to everyone it would cost our business $750,000. per year. We can’t afford that. It’s shocking to us that we are just supposed to come up with that money. So what will happen is we will pay the penalty of about $350,000 (God willing) and it will mean people will lose their jobs and pay cuts. What will our employees gain NOTHING they will actually lose jobs and pay. The Government will collect allot of penalty money of small businesses but I don’t know how it’s going to help small businesses or our employees.

    As far as the richer paying the same percentage as someone making a smaller amount like say Warren Buffet.

    1. Jerry Harness

      $750,000 for insurance at a small business? That sounds insane. I would seriously consider changing providers. But don’t worry, healthcare exchanges will be around soon and you can shop around and compare. Additionally, you can stall, and face the penalties (the fine amounts you are quoting sound like pure fiction unless your ‘small’ business has 175 full-time employees ($2,000/per full time employee)

      Here are some facts from the Wall Street Journal (June 28, 2012) to help you get an honest grasp of the actual penalties for small firms.
      Once your firm reaches 50 full-time equivalent employees, a penalty will kick in if you fail to provide coverage for employees who average 30 or more hours a week in a given month. The penalty is $2,000 for each full-time employee in excess of 30 full-time employees. There are no penalties if part-time employees aren’t offered coverage.
      A key factor in calculating the penalty is that the equation isn’t based on full-time equivalents, but rather on actual full-time employees. That means some businesses that are subject to the penalty may end up owing nothing.
      Here’s a basic example: Say your firm has 25 full-time employees and 50 half-time employees that, combined, equal 25 full-time equivalents. Your firm, in effect, has 50 full-time equivalents and would be subject to the penalty if you don’t provide health-care coverage. However, your penalty cost likely would be zero because the $2,000 tally starts at the 31st full-time employee and you only have 25 full-time employees.
      You can’t just buy any old insurance to avoid the penalty. You have to provide so-called “minimum essential” and “affordable” coverage. Minimum essential coverage means covering 60% of the actuarial value of the cost of the benefits. And affordable means the premium for the coverage of the individual employee cannot exceed 9.5% of the employee’s household income.
      If the coverage you offer is unaffordable, qualifying employees can get subsidized coverage through the tax credit on the state exchanges. In such a case, you will have to pay the lesser of $3,000 per subsidized full-time employee, or the $2,000-per-employee penalty after the first 30 full-time employees.

      Let’s be honest. For the last 25 years, most businesses consider their entire employee force part-time, while reserving full-time position for management (while already offering insurance to those individuals). Many companies, like McDonalds will not notice at thing, while their employees making wages near poverty level will be able to buy insurance for themselves at dirt cheep rates through state exchanges. While this will add extra burdens on states, the Feds will be funding this at 90% at first, reducing down to 70% and staying there, so states should do fine as well.

      In other words, just make your employees part time and don’t contribute crap, but please stop spreading fear and ranting about it, when it hasn’t cost you one cent yet.

  86. I just read all of the above comments and replies. I must be middle class, because of all the comments the “Middle Class” one makes most sense to me. Regardless of how one twists/interprets the issues, the bottom line is that it is getting harder to provide for a family’s basic needs in America. It used to be that a person working 60 hours a week at a regular job, even at minimum wage could provide basic housing for his family. I just read a report that many lower income families are now having to live in homeless shelters because there is not enough low-income housing; and I have a real estate friend who told me that most of the cities in our area will not allow builders to build low income or starter homes. I just read a report that shows that in the last 15 years the poorest 20% in our country have experienced a decline of income of over 11%, the middle 20% have experienced an increase of almost 2%, and at the same time the richest 5% have experienced an increase of over 10%. It appears that the rich are saying to the rest of the world that they will stay rich, regardless of what the rest of the world is experiencing, and that is their entitlement.

  87. MiddleClass

    You can argue these points all day long and you can twist statistics to suite your argument, but facts are facts, the government has had to create jobs before and it works. Our Taxes are at an all-time low. Our country needs our enter structure repaired, and that not only creates jobs and tax revenue it takes people off unemployment which cuts government spending. Plus those people can buy; you know the basic way to grow the economy. Big business needs a reason to create jobs here so they need tax incentives to do that, but they also need to be taxed heavy when they want to take jobs out of the country just because we have a higher standard of living and they have to pay the worker more, that’s how our economy works. One big problem with our debt is the wars we have been in and not paid for. I wonder how quick our Congress would have voted for the war in Iraq if they would have had to add a cross the board % war tax on everyone to pay for it, and better yet how long we would have stayed and how much enter structure would we have paid for. Sure we have to deal with entitlements, but come on we keep printing money and where is it going? Not to the middle class. The middle class wages are stagnant and the rich are sending their money overseas to make even more money. All the people on entitlements are putting it back in the economy. Agreed it’s still a drain but at least it’ staying in the US economy, but these law makers need to do their job and quit blaming each other. Charity starts at home so if you want to blow people live with the consequences, don’t spend my money overseas while we have people going hungry here. I didn’t ask them to go over there, and I didn’t give them poor intelligence about what was going on over there, and I darn well didn’t tell them to spend my money rebuilding their enter structure. These law makers have a good gig, give themselves raises, collect money from the lobbyist, and blame everyone else for the problems. WAKE UP AMERICA

  88. New law: You only get to vote if you pay federal income taxes.

    If you receive government subsidies, you give up your right to vote until you become a “productive” member of society.

    I have to submit to Federally mandated background checks, physical exams, random drug and alcohol testing, and recurrent training with competence testing to earn my (private sector) paycheck. A fraction of my pay gets redistributed to people who abuse drugs , alcohol, wives, kids, and/or “the system.” It seems to me that if we pay people not to work, and don’t attach ANY strings to the benefit, we are not fixing the problem. I gotta jump through the hoops to receive my pay, how about drug/alcohol/background testing to receive benefits?

    We have a moral problem. We feel no responsibility to spend within our means, no remorse in forcing others to pay for the overspending of others. Instead we demonize the 1-2-3-4% who contribute 30+% of the government’s income to redistribute; effectively buying votes. For the middle 50-96%, entitlement spending means there’ll be less money saved for retirement, forcing a number of them into the dependency class upon retirement. Take the savings requirement test and see what a difference an extra $100/month makes over a lifetime.

    The current spending path is unsustainable financially. Keeping people dependent on government, empowers politicians, not the citizens. Remember the whole reason America was founded?

    1. Yeah! Kick ’em when they’re down!!! Are you elderly or disabled, or you can’t find a job because the rich CEOs are sending jobs overseas and then collecting millions in bonuses? Then screw you! You can’t vote either!! A lot of those people who are not paying federal taxes were productive and/or defending our country long before you were born. Sorry that you feel that you are being “demonized” (that must be so hard), but when Mitt Romney pays basically the same effective tax rate that I do, I don’t think the rich are being punished. We should be fixing the tax system to give businesses tax breaks for creating jobs in the U.S. and taxing them heavily for sending jobs overseas. I don’t care how much you make, if you are ACTUALLY a job creator, then you should get tax breaks. If you make millions from being a CEO of a large corporation (e.g a big bank), then you are not a job creator, and your paying a higher tax rate is not going to hurt the economy, in my view.

      1. Janna
        I’m confused; Rich CEO’s are bad for sending jobs overseas, then Romney’s bad for paying the tha same tax rate as you and I. Romney was a huge employer via multiple corporations that he turned around. Most companies stayed solvent and stayed in the US, some expanded into major corporations. Romney received compensation for this in the form of stock options (which ties CEO’s pay to company performance) and he is now a rich man who has paid every bit of his taxes due (contrary to Tim Geithner and Harry Reid). Romney’s current taxes are at a rate of most retired people living off of their savings (he’s gonna get slammed by taxes when he turns 70 and has to take RMDs).
        Your quote, “if you are ACTUALLY a job creator, then you should get tax breaks.” So only liberal/democrat/socialist job creators should get tax cuts while religious, white, wealthy, straight, faithful family male like Romney should be “punished”? These are your own words?!.
        You say, “screw me” and also that I think that I’m “being demonized.” Again, I’m confused; I would submit that YOU are being demonized. Your “news” sources are just filling you with hate (just read your own words!) for your fellow Americans. It worked in 1939 Germany too.

        1. @real issues: Yeah, I see that you are confused….. I didn’t say “Screw you” to you… I was paraphrasing your idea that only those who pay taxes should vote. YOU are saying “screw you” to those you would like to prevent from voting.
          And I didn’t say that the rich SHOULD be punished… I am saying that they are NOT being punished, as you would think they are if you listen to Fox News… And where did I say that only liberal job creators should get tax breaks?????????
          And I DON’T THINK you are being demonized…. YOU think that!!! (Just read your own words!)
          So yeah, you summed it up pretty accurately when you said you’re confused. And I am in no way filled with hate for my fellow Americans. You may be projecting your own feelings.

        2. Bain was not a

          “Romney was a huge employer via multiple corporations that he turned around.” That’s more than a bit misleading. Bain Capital (during as well as before and after the Romney era) “turned around” companies by slashing costs, and we both know that means jobs. Companies who hired Bain were doing everything they could to reduce headcount. Sure, they were huge employers, just not quite as huge after Romney came to the rescue.

      2. Should the rich pay a lot more in taxes? Look at it from this point of view, it cost a lot of money to manufacture an aircraft carrier, a jet plane if fact any weapon. The people who put their lives on the line also have to be paid. Now Donald Trump ownes this hotel and casino, my holdings compare to that compare like the size of a bebie to a railroad box car, so he should pay more insurance for his protection. Remember insurance for real estate have a war clause that says they will not reimburse you if you lose your property to an act of war.

  89. hard worker

    the problem is not income taken by the goverment but money spent by our goverment way out of balance

    1. Weird how the government tries to dictate how we should manage our finances while the government can’t even spend less than they earn and balance a budget isn’t it?! It’s RIDICULOUS!

  90. I used to work at McDonalds, 2 years ago (2009) and I made 7.25 and hour, which is minimum wage, at 40 hours a week I made $1160 BEFORE taxes. I was also in college full time at the time so Im so sorry that I didnt have the time to work 60+ hours a week. So Im not sure why you think working at McD’s would be so great now. As for getting this imaginary great 2nd job? Im sorry, what world do you live in? A second McD’s job? Where are these awesome jobs? I have a college degree and 2 good jobs, still make about $50K/year. As for moving to where the good jobs are…well I dont know if your aware, but moving costs money. Poor people are not typically the most mobile of people, for financial reasons. I would think all of this would be obvious if you had ever been poor, but it sounds like when you worked at mcd’s you probably either lived with your middle or upper class parents or they at least helped you out a good bit.

    1. I don’t call someone making $50K/year poor by any means. What country are you living in, Luxembourg?

      Taking a Greyhound bus anywhere in America doesn’t cost more than several hundred bucks. Go where the jobs are, or don’t if you are happy with what you have. It took Americans 3 months to travel cross country hundreds of years ago. What’s several days?

      1. When you’re living paycheck to paycheck “a few hundred bucks” may as well be a million. Plus, you need something for a damage deposit as well as rent, food and other living expenses until you find that dream job. Why don’t you just tell them to eat cake? You have no concept of what it’s like to be poor in America. And that’s the problem.

        1. I lived in a third world country (El Salvador) and can safely say that if you have an education and if you come from the right family there is absolutely zero worry to be had. Just throwing out the third-world country moniker doesn’t mean you know what it’s like to be a poor person in a third world. I’m guessing you came from well-to-do parents, F.S. In many ways, it’s a lot easier to live in a poor nation as someone who makes money. My parents were squarely middle class (in the American sense of income earned) and they were able to afford a maid, a beach house, American schooling and other luxuries that they would never be able to afford in the U.S.

          Also, the point that lower-income to poor people not having the means to move is factual. Can it be done (moving)? Yes. Is being poor or low-income a huge impediment to mobility? Heck yes!

  91. Semilogical

    The Clinton “surplus” was not an actual value that you can hang a hat on. When the budget is a deficit budget and you don’t spend all that you borrowed from the fed, then what you have is a time when you didn’t spend what was budgeted but spent more than you took in with taxes.

    And as “Me” pointed out, Clinton raided other funds which most likely has quite a bit of bearing on the circumstances we found our selves in after January 2007 when the Democrats took over the House and Senate, creating the 2008 crash.

  92. “Clinton, on the other hand, RAISED taxes (because we NEEDED THE REVENUE) and it was this additional revenue that created the surplus of the ’90′s”

    Wrong.
    Clinton’s “surplus” came from raiding money from many different money pools that government controls. He in essence took money from one pocket, put it in his other pocket and said “look at all this surplus money my policies created!”

    in 2000, Clinton claimed a $230B surplus, but Clinton borrowed
    $152.3B from Social Security
    $30.9B from Civil Service Retirement Fund
    $18.5B from Federal Supplementary Medical insurance Trust Fund
    $15.0B from Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
    $9.0B from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund
    $8.2B from Military Retirement Fund
    $3.8B from Transportation Trust Funds
    $1.8B from Employee Life Insurance & Retirement fund
    $7.0B from others

    Total borrowed from off budget funds $246.5B, meaning that his $230B surplus is actually a $16.5B deficit.
    ($246.5B borrowed – $230B claimed surplus = $16.5B actual deficit).

    If there is ever a true surplus, then the national debt will go down.

    1. Clinton also benefited from the biggest stock market bubble since the 20s, housing price bubble, the deregulation of the banks (credit expansion soared in the 90s), and a Republican congress that forced spending in check including welfare reform. The reason we ran massive deficits in the 80s and 00s is because spending increased by over 6% per year while tax income only went up by 3-4% per year, and of course both parties are to blame (eg Bush with 2 wars/nation building campaigns + Medicare part D). If any business operated like government did it would be bankrupt in no time.

  93. Nice to see the rich are not above ABUSING UNEMPLOYMENT by having no intention of getting a job after engineering their layoff when they’re ready to retire. And they complain about welfare queens.

  94. asking people below the poverty line to pay an additional $43/month in taxes (over payroll taxes) is just plain stupid. They will require a greater amount from social welfare programs to make up the difference, and any “savings” will be lost in the bureaucratic overhead for those programs. Oh but wait you probably think the social safety net is a waste of money. More sage advice: try to hit the soup line twice, you’ll have more energy for that great second job!

      1. But you did, Samurai. The bottom 50% of earners obviously includes those below the poverty line, and you wrote: “All we have to do is make the bottom 50% who pay no taxes pay just $43 a month in taxes and we’d raise $60 billion a year right there!”

        1. Then I’m clarifying now.

          I understand why people can’t or don’t want to pay taxes. As a new retiree, I plan to shelter as much income as possible. We must accept big government is here to stay and therefore we must do our best to protect our hard earned income and assets from wasteful government spending.

  95. We “NEEDED THE REVENUE” because we spent more than we collected (for both sides to buy votes). Clinton raised taxes that, in part, caused the recession that W inherited (Clinton even said he “probably raised taxes too much,” pretty honest statement for a politician). The Clinton surpluses were achieved, in part, to the ending of the welfare system and cutting the military, reducing significant spending and forcing people back to private sector work and paying taxes.

    Overspending was wrong when Republicans had White House, Congress and Senate for 2 years during Bush’s term. Overspending is still wrong when the Democrats control the WH, Congress and Senate for 2 years during Obama’s tenure. We just don’t hear about it from the Demedia. We threw away $1 trillion with nothing to show for it.

    Reagan raised some taxes to compromise with Tip O’Neil and keep the government functional. “Daddy Bush” didn’t initially compromise with Congress and the government shut down. Of the 535 Congress members, 102 Senators and the 1 Republican president, guess who the Demedia blamed?

    With the exception of your well supprted JFK tax cuts, I don’t know where you are getting your “facts” from. How can you attribute tax increases, without factoring spending, to the “surplus of the 90’s”?

    Address issues, not party. There’s not enough tax revenue available to match our spending. We must cut spending by millions for every dollar of tax increase. We are very near the edge of the cliff. Stop pointing at the various drivers and let’s find the brake pedal and turn the steering wheel.

    1. Jerry Harness

      Some great points here, but the extreme austerity approach seems to be failing world wide. While it is true that reconsolidation can be necessary for any business, there is also a limit on how much and where expenditures can be cut in order to stay in business. While I fully agree that spending more than we make is poor budgeting, any well run business knows that there are other ways to balance the books besides cutting expenses. One reason is growth. Any company that grows must increase spending to meet the needs of the future. This includes incensement in investments, innovation and market positioning. Even in tough time, business must still invested, innovate, and take some risks. Regardless, there are multitudes of ways of increasing revenues in business besides raising your price too.

      Governments must also increase spending regularly to meet the needs of the future, yet must also balance their books accordantly by increasing revenues. And just like in business, governments have more options than increasing taxes (the price citizens are charged). From changing trade policies to providing growth incentives, anything that improves market conditions, increases revenues. And just like in business, once revenues are on track, expenditures become justified, but there is always room for improvement.

      Personally, I like many Republic ideas of a balanced approach to government programs, such as community service requirements for those who receive government aid or even only bills that are fiscally neutral, yet they seem to focus only on limited areas of the budget (Democrats only on the others). This concept should be applies to all our expenditures and taxes. Understandably, some risks must be taken, such as investing in new technology and innovation; unfortunately, too many of our expenditures show no clear return or even potential return on the investment.

      Education and highways are clear and necessary investments with obvious returns on the investment, yet neither will fair well if just blindly funded, so need regular review. On the other; specialized tax loop holes for single entities are even more ambiguous, with little oversight or review. For example, a new highway increases traffic flow and productivity: a necessary investment. These costs are examines and reviewed on a regular basis. On the other hand, grant money to a university to develop a better solar cell is a risk, but with a clear potential return of making our solar industry more competitive. Investments in fledgling industries are also examined and reviewed on a regular basis. Yet, grant to top oil and coal manufacturers, industries well developed and placed in the market, provides a unclear return. A fledgling company receiving a grant will ask what they need to give in return (usually it is just to succeed); while a massive company on a 40 year old grant considers these funds just part of their budget, a government crutch, rather than an incentive to provide a honest return of appreciation for their grant money. Like any government aid program. They can be very helpful, but only in the short term and are never a long term solution.

      I support going over every, single, government expenditure on the books and ensuring each is providing an honest return on the investment, but instead of starting at the bottom (Welfare reform, S.S. reform), I would start at the top (Industry/Special Interest grants). What I think Republicans fear the most about a top down approach, (and they are fully justified for doing so), is that we will stop ½ way through the process and not finish what we start. Democrats fear the opposite. Chances are, we’ll just have to start at both ends and work our way to the middle. But regardless, until Americans are once again assured that our government is wisely working to build and develop our nation and not just a select few (top or bottom), confidence will continue to remain at an all time low.

  96. @PunkyAmerica
    W’s tax cuts brought in more revenue than ever in the history of the US. Fighting two wars and reckless domestic spending did away with those surpluses not tax cuts.

    1. Financial Samurai, you my friend, are an idiot. The world has repeatedly proven that socialism does not work, yet you keep pushing the button hoping for your treat. get off your ass and earn what you deserve. If you haven’t earned it, you don’t deserve it!

      1. If Socialism is so bad, why did America vote for bigger and bigger government over the next four years?

        Is it not rational to kick back and live the good life if there is a huge safety net? We can take more risks and pursue are dreams as well. Are you saying Americans voted for the wrong candidate?

      2. That’s not true. Socialism is alive and doing well in a number of countries around the world. And in most of those countries the residents enjoy better health, longer lives, better education and an all around better standard of living. Is pure socialism the answer? Of course not, but neither is pure capitalism, because sooner or later, as we’re seeing here in the US, one segment gets all the money and power and we cease being a free market and become an oligopoly. And that shouldn’t be a surprise since we’re living in an oligarchy.

      3. Jerry Harness

        Considering that the out of the top ten nations, all have some form of socialism and all have a healthy standard of living to boot, with Germany doing extremely well. (Average income $88k), and massive social programs to boot (most have free healthcare, free education, free retirement (excluding US…for now)). Although many socialist nations ask their citizens to contribute nearly 50% of their income towards taxes, there are rarely any complaints, due to the stability to their society these programs have provided. Yet in all the developed nations, it is an on going battle.

        No form of government is perfect and our forefathers knew perfectly well that our own constitutional system was flawed from the start, which is why the concept of amendments was introduced from the very beginning. They were very scared of us adopting the old English system of few property owners and the consolidation of wealth and power at the top. This was the very purpose of the separation of powers, were no branch of government had total control. Regardless of these checks and balances, they knew that even with their best ideas, the job of defining a more perfect common-wealth would be far from complete, if ever.

        Change is normal in our nation and always has been. If we are not able to adapt to the changing world economic, we won’t survive. We have two different directions we can go as we adapt. Either towards the more comprehensive social net programs used by other developed nations to provide a fair living standard(Capitalism/Socialism mix) or towards the 3rd worlds slave labor plutocracy(Capitalism/Oligarchy mix) where the wealthy control all opportunity. Unfortunately, we seem to be leaning towards the later.

        And Dtrain…very few earn what they deserve.

  97. Interesting statistics. It is surprising to me how low the average income is in the US. With inflation on the rise, I do not know how people survive with those income rates.

    1. Be very careful when articles quote averages on anything. I believe the average in this article refers to what Americans earn. There are many Americans that earn nothing (retirees, unemployed, disability, etc although they do receive funds) so they drag the average down. I’m willing to bet that if they included only income of working families the average would increase significantly.

  98. I noticed you didn’t figure in payroll like social security tax that is only paid on the first 100K. If you reallyh want fairness and equality in taxing you would also be pushing that everyone pay this on all their income.

  99. @Andrew
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/correction-please/760

    “Henry Morgenthau, who served as Roosevelt’s treasury secretary, admitted to a congressional committee in May 1939 (as quoted in the recent book New Deal or Raw Deal? by Burton Folsom, Jr.): “We are spending more money than we have ever spent before and it does not work…. We have never made good on our promises…. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … and an enormous debt to boot.””

  100. When Kennedy lowered taxes, revenue went up. When Reagan lowered taxes, revenue skyrocketed. When Bush lowered taxes, the government had record revenues.

    Why are some on here of the belief that if we do the opposite, we will get the same result.

    Obama even admitted that revenue would shrink if taxes were raised. He said it was just fair.

    Just to be clear. Obama is not “asking” the top 1% to pay more. He is proposing that the government take more money from them.

    If you were told that any money you made over $200k would be taxed at 100%, would you go out and work your butt off to make 300k? or would you stop at 200k because there was no incentive to make more?

    1. but nobody is taxed at 100% period. if im poor i pay in proportion to my income. if i am poor it is much harder for me to live well at the rate of inflation than if i was rich. the rich’s income increase faster that the poor’s income

      1. When Bush lowered taxes, the government had record revenues.

        The key word there is WHEN. Later they plummeted.
        GHW Bush’s increase in taxes, for which he was wrongly excoriated by his right wing party, were responsible for the 1990’s surge. That and artificially low oil costs. Clinton’s reduction was ill considered and responsible for the recession in 2000/2001.

        Enjoy

        1. Alecia Hawthorne

          Bush did not artificially lower oil costs, we have oil in this country, We even have reserves for emergencies, such as Sandy, that have not been tapped into. We also have oil in North Dakota that is 20 times the oil that was discoversd at Spindletop and that is only ONE of TWENTY…the only problem is our President. He keeps making laws to make it harder to drill or frack for it. It takes a private citizen at LEAST a YEAR to get a permit to drill on their on land, THEN they have the EPA to fight. Government needs to get out of our business and let us help this country.

          America is the only country in the history of man that was formed with a single idea in mind, to protect the citizens rights and the citizens pursuit of happiness. The governments purpose, the governments end, was the citizens…WAS the citizens, it is no longer the citizens. Now the citizens have become a MEANS of government…let me explain.President Obama has a dream of National healthcare, it may be a very compelling idea but his idea of healthcare is not MY dream, and yet, President Obama is usung the force of the Federal Government, the coercive power of the Federal Government to compel, not just me and you, but every single American to FUND his dream, This is NOT the purpose of the American Government.

        2. Lower taxes and tax revenue goes up. History shows and proves itself. Liberal Democrats raise taxes during these prosperous times and blame others for the failures. Insecure people like to drag other people down. Bush gets hammered for 5% unemployment while Obama gets praised for unemployment dropping to 7.9%. History has shown what happens over and over. Too bad people (yes, they are people too) can’t understand that there is a bigger world than what their little eyes can see and comprehend!!!!

          1. If you check the unemployment figures when GWB left office the unemployment rate was much higher than five percent it was closer to eight percent.

        3. then it is truly interesting that Calif for the first time in decades has record surpluses, some 4 billion, because W’s tax cuts expiring next year induced capital rich folks to sell now at a lower gains rate then later.

          This assertion that lower taxes drive up tax revenues is dogma. There is no evidence, by economists and econometricians anywhere, that back up that assertion.

          It reinforces how powerful tribal gossip is. That Arthur Laffer’s drivel on back of a napkin asserting such economic nonsense gets spewed as facts just because one wishes free lunches were so.

      2. CHUCKSTER, it is only fair that ALL recipients receive equal reward for their contribution. As such, all contributors should pay equally. That is to say, EVERYONE should pay the same tax rate (e.g. 15% income tax for everyone regardless of income).

        1. So what you’re saying is:

          If there are 50 million households making $20k/year or less, they should be taxed at the same rate as the 15k or so households making $500k per year, despite the fact that the cost of living between the two is marginally higher?

          I’m guessing for that to be viable, the 15k households must buy contribute considerably more to the GDP than the 50 million households in the $20k range, in order to economically equitable within the US. Now on top of it, the 50 million households that have less disposable income are spending less money, while the 15k with the most disposable income are saving more money. That seems like it will do well for the GDP.

        2. Effective tax rates and income tax rates are entirely different things. +/- 5%, everyone has been paying an equal share of their income in taxes for a few decades now.

          You need to take into account more than just income taxes – we pay taxes all the time (sales tax, licenses, registration, etc.), and most taxes are regressive in nature and not progressive like federal/(some)state income taxes are. As a function of income, those small taxes hit people with lower incomes to a very high degree in terms of percentage, but hardly register with the more fortunate.

    2. I am curious about this, If Reagan was a conservative and his tax lowering increased revenues so much then how and why did the national debt almost triple during his term?
      He also did away with the personal interest deduction which effectively raised taxes on lower income people who cannot afford to pay cash for things like cars…I remember it killed me.

      1. mysticaltyger

        The debt went up in Reagan’s time because the government has a spending problem, pure and simple. The government is a perfect example of a high income couple who are always in debt no matter how much they make. There are a fair number of high income folks out there like that…and that’s what our government is like, too. Getting rid of deductions for consumer debt was a good thing, in my opinion…it discourages people from takine on excessive debt. Of course, the banks found a loophole because it didn’t include home equity loans. I think they should take away the deductibility of home equity loans as well…It will discourage people from using their homes as ATMs.

      2. Several thing:

        First, we were in the midst of the cold war, which Reagan won without firing a single shot, by bankrupting our enemy.

        Second, he had a Dumbocrap congress that demanded ALL the extra revenue, and MORE, be spent to buy them votes.

        Third, You are an uninformed idiot.

    3. And what was the income gap between the executive and the employee in the early 60s and early 80s? Let’s go back to those numbers, too, shall we? See, the problem is, when you’re making $30,000 a year and have 20% taken in taxes, you live on $24,000 a year. When you make $300,000 a year and are taxed at 20%, you have to struggle through life on $240,000 per year. Now do you get it? The well off have been coddled for far too long and the playing field is very much tilted in their direction. And why wouldn’t it be, as they have the money, the power and make the rules. What do you expect from alleged patriotic Americans who had as the “top priority” to make Obama a one term president? Not the economy, not the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but a power grab. That tells you all you need to know.

        1. Jerry Harness

          Equality is important, but this author describes only income tax, which only accounts for 80% of Federal taxes, let alone state taxes. When ALL taxes are include, the amount of taxes paid by each income group is closely proportionate to their percentage of income.

          For example, in 2011, the bottom 20% of earners (Ave. $13k) brought in 3.4% of the income and paid 2.1% of all taxes. The top 1% of earners (Ave. $1.37 mil) brought in 21% of the income and paid 21.6% of all taxes. (Institute on Taxation and Economics Policy Tax Model April 2012)

          We all have skin in the game, when you take off the income tax blinders, and consider all taxes.

          1. Fred Cannon

            But you are not accounting for the fact that the lower 20% income earners get over 100% of there taxes they paid throughout the year returned to them in refund and credits so they are not paying their fair share. Just because you paid taxes through the year does not make you a tax payer if it all gets returned to you plus some.

            1. You do not take into account the taxes returned to large corporations and companies as incentives for doing business, nor as subsidies for certain products — not saying that is wrong (Though often it is), just saying there is more to the picture. Or how very large companies, through use of their funds and political connections, get the vast majority of government contracts, meaning a very large percentage of their income comes directly from our taxes. Nor do you take into account that business, all business, is dependent upon infrastructure far more than the average poor American, and hence, are responsible for a much larger share of the costs.
              On a side note, the effective tax rate of the top tiers could be lowered by requiring a living wage, insurance included, be paid to all employees. If you can not pay a living wage, pay for healthcare, and do business, then you have no business being in business. No need for higher taxes.
              On another side note, the taxation rate is a game. When taxes go down, the wealthy sell of certain assets, driving up revenue. When taxes go up, they buy instead. Don’t mistake increases revenues for anything more than this. And it is only temporary, as has been proven over and over.

  101. I never understood how taking a percentage was fair. Because someone makes more money they somehow use more government services? Right. With our tax system, the wealthy will always be paying for the poor–who instead of being happy about it, always want more. This is exactly how nearly every other democracy that’s existed on this planet has crumbled–look it up. So I have an idea… no taxes. Make everything fee-based… pay for what you use. Roads are paid for by licensing fees, schools by tuition, police by a municipal “rent”. So what about the poor? Well it seems that so many people are concerned about them–I’m sure people would be more willing to help them voluntarily than involuntarily! If things keep going the way they are, anyone making more than $50K a year will be the top 1%–I’d just love to see how they feel about paying nearly 40% of federal taxes! :)

    1. I just wish people didn’t have the power to vote to raise taxes on other people without having to pay more themselves. That to me is robbery, or tyranny. Everybody pitch in, or nobody!

  102. I am honestly baffled about what i’m hearing, but since most of you are in top 25% or higher i guess it only makes sense. Have you made minimum wage recently? There is no way someoen could afford to survive on 250$. And your right people can move up but as a person going to college right now and trying to work its not easy and i was one of the more inteligent ppl in my graduating class. I have no time to study to try and pay my bills i’m normally exhausted, if i had kids i would never be able to finish. This is someoen who breezed through high school, its not easy nor obvious that people can just decide one day to make more money. It’s difficult and often a risk. Most people dont realize college is a risk, if you dont graduate for any reason thats 10’s of thousands of dollars of debt you racked up. The reason why the top %’s should pay more taxes is b/c it wont effect them nearly as deeply, aside from the fact that most Millionares stash away so much money and write off fake charitys so they dont pay as much as they should. You know why it wont effect them as deeply, in case any are curious, they dont live pay check to pay check, 43$ can mean the difference of a week of not eating or one bill not being payed, there goes my credit score. I wasnt raised with money and when i do finish college and i’m making as much as most of you do i will never be so self-centered as to think that everyoen would be better off if the poor make up for what the rich dont want to pay. Btw Mitt Romney is, to put it bluntly, incompetent. The trickle down theory has never worked, tax breaks to the rich only means more money to the rich. Want more jobs, government jobs are far better than any McDonalds have to offer. In case people dont remember the depression it was mass government spending that brought us out of the depression not cutbacks and tax breaks.

    1. When I was poor, I could set aside $43 a month for taxes to help contribute. I’m not suggestion those in poverty pay. I’m suggesting everybody who is above poverty at least contribute something in federal income taxes and we can all be proud of our country and make it stronger!

  103. William Orthman

    Your article suggests the bottom 50% should pay $43 per month in taxes. I truly believe this shows how disconnected you are from the bottom 50% of our nation. They don’t have $43 ‘extra’ to send to Uncle Sam.

  104. I’m admittedly in the bottom 50% and for the sake of argument the least educated to comment. But I feel that for one, the source here is biased and has an agenda. “Don’t argue with fools because from a distance you can’t tell who is who.” Everyone should be intelligent enough to understand that. I don’t vote due to the pure ignorance displayed by both sides. Two people (sides) that refuse to appreciate the other’s argument will never find a solution in my poor opinion. “Two heads are better than one.” “United we stand, divided we FALL.” etc…
    Also, you can manipulate numbers to prove ANY point you want by being deceptive. Numbers are the greatest manipulation tool. (Taking the Bible out of context comes in second…)
    Life is very short and precious and I choose to not spend it arguing over taxes or politics. (very hypocritical post,eh?) Regardless of who is elected or how much tax I pay I will live my life how I see fit and not allow others to dictate me simply because they chose left or right, red or blue, Ford or Chevy, Miller or Bud,etc… Next time, consider posting a comment to a loved one instead of arguing about who’s paying what. If you’re not in that 0.01% , you’re at their mercy anyway. They contribute to both campaigns so they win. You should thank God you’re alive, let alone not in the bottom .01% of a nation with a lower standard of living. :) God Bless

  105. This entire debate is based on a fallacy, which is that your effective Federal income tax rate is the same as your total effective tax rate, taking into account state and local taxes and payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare). There is a cap on the earned income subject to Social Security taxes, which in 2010 was $106,800. The standard employee SS contribution is 6.2% of that maximum amount (there is no cap on the Medicare tax, which amounts to 1.45% of all earned income). If you leave out SS and Medicare withholding the Federal income tax looks pretty progressive. If you include these, the picture changes dramatically, and you get the following:

    Bracket Effective Tax rate
    Top 25% 25.0%
    Top 10% 23.3%
    Top 5% 25.8%
    Top 1% 25.4%

    Not so progressive after all, is it? And if you are self-employed, as 10% of the workforce is, you get a double whammy: since you are both employer and employee, you have to pay employer’s share of SS and Medicare taxes as well as the employees, for 15.3% in addition to Federal income taxes.

    Remember, these are effective, not statutory, tax rates, so they already take into account all the various exemptions, deductions, tax credits, and/or alternative minimum tax payments embedded in the tax code. I won’t go into state income taxes, which tend to allow fewer deductions than the Federal tax, and I will not get into property taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, cigarette and alcohol taxes, etc., all of which are fairly regressive, because poorer people spend a greater share and save less of their income than better-off people.

  106. Someone said that everyone pays 35% to SS That is ridiculous. It is 15% and your employer pays half of that. Why should the rich pay that percentage over all of their income when the benefit ends at $117,000 approx. Someone brought up a woman with no legs and 10 children. I guess that is how she got the ten children. Another thing, medicare is going to go broke under the current plan. Take a look at your pay stub and see what you pay each week. It is a very small amount. One year of bad health in old age would go through every penny you paid in while working. There is one grim reality we all need to face. It is called REALITY. Stop complaining and work harder and more hours, instead of being a parasite who wants a piece of someone elses hard work.

  107. I love the logical contortions you make to try and make these arguments sound reasonable. The US has one of the lowest tax burdens in the industrialized world. WE limit payroll taxes at the top but have a problem with limiting income tax at the bottom. And you ACT like you are making logical arguments.

    Warren Buffett estimates his expenditures at less than 500K per year so sales tax is applicable to <1% of his income but the lower brackets are taxed on almost 100%. And of course EVERYBODY should be paying for the SEC because everyone does stock and options trading right?

    "Socialism as a form of governance is bad; it kills the soul, dulls the mind, and will ultimately mutate and engulf you in slavery. It is a lethal game of musical chairs.
    True and clean capitalism is good; it will drive you to think, grow, respond, and act with all effort to reach a higher place in fairness. Conversely, it can be turned into a evil machine if we allow thieves (like banks and politicians) to warp it and steal from us behind closed doors."

    This is absolute nonsense. Idiocy. I heard the exact opposite in the Soviet Union. Neither is correct. Capitalism and Socialism are tools in an economic toolbox.The best run economies use all of their tools but Americans are becoming too dumb. Germany recently has a bond issue at a negative interest rate. And they use a lot more of that "socialist" tool than we do but I guess they just do have the true believers of the capitalist religion. Hallelujah brother, you tell 'em.

    1. Just curious why you and so many against the message of equality use Warren buffet as an example. Does
      He represent the common man or even the common rich man? Why use such extreme?

  108. The problem is this doesn’t address the cost-of-living, housing, inflation and minimum wage statistics. The bottom 50% pay less than their mathematical tax% because even paying only 2.7% still leaves them unable to keep up with the current speed of inflation and be able to afford to even live. Still….since the top 1%, roughly 300,000 people pay 38% in taxes and earn literaly 10 times the yearly income as each of the bottom 50% earn, then shouldn’t those bottom ones pay 10X less? like 3.8%? seem better than magically thinking they should earn 10X less but pay only 3X less in taxes? doesnt make sense

  109. Strike Zero

    It is not equitable that 47% of the country’s population do not pay any income taxes. However, it is unreasonable to infer that the top 5% are unfairly taxed. The point made on payroll taxes is dead on point and that is not factored into the evaluation equation. In addition, to state that investment income should be taxed at a lower rate, or not taxed at all, because of the risk is ludicrous. Individuals who make a substantial portion of their annual income from investments are usually not subjected to the $2000 writeoff limitation – they are invariably operating as a sub chapter corporation or some sort or an LLC, either way they would file schedule C’s for their investment activitiy which does not have that limitation. Thus, investment losses incurred in any given year are taken in full, which in turn allows for the offset of any income reported from other sources – why do you think Romney is up for paying NO income taxes in certain years. I concur that there should be some differential in tax rates, investments versus wages, but such a difference should be reasonable and as income from the former increases, so should the rates. This country has little old ladies, having buried 3 husbands, clipping coupons on tax free bonds to generate 6 – 7 digit income streams and pay no taxes whatsoever. That’s simply not equitable. The tax code needs to be reformed to deliver a more equitable distribution of the country’s tax requirements. Some portion of the lower 50% should be required to pay taxes, as long as it doesn’t throw them into poverty; but many within the top 50% are also walking away with a free lunch. If the Government would only take this problem seriously, we could resolve it but instead they are too busy catering to the Special Interest groups and lobbyists. What a shame.

  110. neoconcrazy

    If 50.00/mo. is so affordable, then why are republicons so against health care reform, in which everyone pays for healthcare at 1% of their income. Everyone pays, everyone is covered. A person making 5000/year pays 50.00/mo. for healthcare. Seems fair. It was actually a republicons idea (Romney) that started in MA. When Obama tried to adapt the same plan for the country conservatives bashed it. Why the hypocrasy?

  111. neoconcrazy

    So according to your math, you worked 40 hours/wk at McD’s and still made 550 a mo? What about Medicare, Social Security, State and Federal tax withheld? How well were you doing after that? And you stated that minimum wage is 3X higher now than it was at 3.50/hour? So do you actually believe our current minimum wage is 10.50/hour? It’s not, it’s 7.25, and would be much less if republicons had their way. And another side job? If your working your butt off at McD’s for 40 hours/week (fast food is hard work, I know I’ve done it too) how do you have the time for another “side job?” And your motto to “never quit,” how many people laid off were quiting. I guess when a guy is two months short of full retirement and gets let go so the company doesn’t have to pay what is owed, thats called quiting in you book. BTW, everyone who works pays federal taxes, based on their salary. Those making poverty level wages (14,000/year for singles) can get their federal tax back when they file taxes. So your 47% don’t pay taxes garbage is just that, total garbage. I’m in the top 25%, but still believe in a tax system based on the more you make the more you should pay, it’s common sense.

  112. Marion Paroo

    What is with the photo of President Obama, the little whit dog (not Bo) and the Lincoln Memorial? Weird.

  113. Richard E J Driskill

    With great sadness, I confess I did not have the time to read all the posting on this topic. From the several I did read in the beginning, I feel I must comment on the ideology (concerning poverty/wealth + socialism/capitalism) that strikes me as flat-out wrong.

    A few points to inform you of my background: I am 56 years old with a 132 IQ (Binet), married with a son, a retired Electromagnetic Spectrum Authority out of NYC (retired when I was 38). I have been all over this ‘scale’ of contention, from earning and buying a $400 Pentax Ashia 35mm SLR camera when I was 14 (back in 1970), to being utterly homeless for 3 years during my 20’s, to later in my late 30’s owning a $2M home on the Intracoastal in South Florida with a 44′ yacht, personal 28′-3″ Superstretch limo, Cadillac STS, deck-out truck, jewlerly, art, etc., to being in financial dire straits as of late. The highest personal AmEx bill I ever racked-up was >$17k (mainly due to a high-end watch purchased); now I must strive to keep it under $3k at all costs. I conduct myself in what I think of as a Christian way, but do not belong to or go to any church; I am an agnostic because God never spoke to me personally. I have traveled across the country visiting about half the states and have been to Europe and the UK. Many millions have been ‘legally’ stolen from me, and Wall Street has ‘lost’ about a million of my money. The IRS one year told me I still owed another $46,000. The factors surrounding this has nothing to do with the point I will raise, other than to inform you I have experienced all the drama associated within the poor/rich scale. Ergo, I have knowledge of the human experience in it’s broad impact concerning psychology.

    With that said, I am a conservative, and always have been. A individual’s poverty is not automatically a bad thing; they may not be all that interested in wealth. What is important is how the poverty came to be; was it through stupidity and sloth, or was it for a lack of material want? What is important is how the wealth came to be; was it through intelligence and honest work, or was it via theft and unbridled greed? I can tell you that “money” is nothing but a tool (and yes, it is a great tool to have), but, -it- is not your real purpose in life.

    There is nothing inherently wrong or bad with being ‘poor’, just as there is nothing inherently wrong or bad with being ‘rich’.

    In either case, and I speak with experience, the state of a persons possessions will not fundamentally change that individuals demeanor, that individuals core values. The only factors that truly, deeply impact the person’s mind are physical pain, poor health, or something stolen from them (material or mental). If you are a SOB or a nice guy when you are poor, you will be the same if you become rich (and vice versa).

    In the past, it was the community, particularly the church, that helped the poor (via donations and volunteers), and there were no dead bodies laying around unclaimed on the streets. The only demand is that you must commit to a life of honest diligence and conduct under the spiritual word of God to claim your self-reliance again with these people. It was a helping hand, but it was not required by law. Caring can be very different then supporting (church vs government).

    In the present era (40ish years), it is predominately our government that provides assistance (via taxes), but with no mandate to change what brought this on (such as unashamed unwed women with a penchant for churning out more and more babies, or refusal to garner an education favoring gangsterism instead, or an ingrained hatred for those better off), only a time frame to the end of benefits. This is a system of control that slowly, slowly brings on socialism. Socialism’s fastest track to flurishing is to push class warfare, where a majority will always be mentally driven that they are being short-changed. Please remember, our nation was wisely founded on it being a Constitutional Republic (and technically still is); we are not living in a democracy (and never have). They only thing democratic about our form of government is the vote we cast. Being a Constitutional Republic stops the few things cast in stone for a nation of free men from being changed easily (such as at the word of a king), by a whim, by the fancy of the mob in the moment. Of course socialism works very well… until you run out of other people’s money. Socialism has never worked; it has always failed, and it will always fail. It starts with the (false) promise of equality (and nobody can give you that), then drifts to dependance, then to falls into slavery. There will always be those (the people that are the ‘state’) that are outside the norm in the socialism structure; the controllers of the system, the hidden. Remember, they will not live as you and the rest of the people do. Yes, we are all born equal, but, we (as individuals) write our own paths based on the cards we are delt -and- how we play them. Do you honestly believe that through the magic of thought and want that all men will (or should be) 6′-2″ tall? How about blond haired/blue eyed/tanned to perfection/and looks like [fill in the blank]? The examples could go on and on, but the bottom line is there will always be those that are taller/shorter, thinner/fatter, weaker/stronger/, more intelligent/ more illiterate, prettier/uglier, and of course younger and older.

    If you are truly frightened to be rich (normally due to a lack of intelligence), verily you will be poor. If you are truly frightened to be poor (normally due to an abundance of emotion), you will make it your mission to be rich at all costs. The question I pose is, is money or lack thereof, the whole proof of our lives? Do we really need to covet what we have not earned ouselves? Don’t confuse the concept of unbridled greed with greed (nothing more than an intense want of something). Do not confuse sympathy and empathy, they are different. I, personally, am unsympathetic to 99.9% of all impoverished people (of todays society); I am empathetic to the other 0.1% when I am convinced (through conversation and conduct) of their unjustified plight, and it is on those rare occasions when I help. When it comes to non-money situations, I’m the guy helping someone push their car off the road and seeing if I can help them with automotive knowledge or a ride to the gas station; I’m the guy knocking the perpetrator on his ass when he assualts a woman.

    On the direct subject of federal taxes: The perfect balance to a truly healthy economy (who’s definiton has been basterdized to fool you) is a tax of exactly 10% minus $1 on all individuals (no schemes, no adjustments). This will allow a conservative level of growth, remove all extraneous ‘programs’ to society, returning to a pragmatic level where the bare minimum of federal goverance does not include anything beyond paying for a standing army, collecting taxes from foreign importation, a force of interacting unity for the states, national intercourse with other nations, etc. This mere 10% tax will compel people to respect the material things of use, to create things of durability, to conserve, to only spend what the coffers actually hold.

    To the poor: Stand or fall, live or die, on your own, you have chosen your path (with a few exceptions, you are ‘due’ no assistance). Conform, work till you bleed if you wish to change your plight.
    To the rich: You better be 100% aboveboard, a beacon to others, honest as the day is long (and if you are not, then you deserve the mob’s anger). Lead, pay it foward (by choice, not tax). Prove to the dullards it actually works, by honest example.

    Socialism as a form of governance is bad; it kills the soul, dulls the mind, and will ultimately mutate and engulf you in slavery. It is a lethal game of musical chairs.

    True and clean capitalism is good; it will drive you to think, grow, respond, and act with all effort to reach a higher place in fairness. Conversely, it can be turned into a evil machine if we allow thieves (like banks and politicians) to warp it and steal from us behind closed doors.

    1. Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with much of what you say, however, not this:

      “To the poor: Stand or fall, live or die, on your own, you have chosen your path (with a few exceptions, you are ‘due’ no assistance). Conform, work till you bleed if you wish to change your plight.
      To the rich: You better be 100% aboveboard, a beacon to others, honest as the day is long (and if you are not, then you deserve the mob’s anger). Lead, pay it foward (by choice, not tax). Prove to the dullards it actually works, by honest example.”

      If you so happen to be born to a single mother who makes minimum wage, and doesn’t have the time to nurture you, you will be at a big disadvantage to many of your wealthier peers. We need to help level the playing field, invest in our libraries, create safe parks for our kids, and lend this mother and her child a hand.

      I believe it is our duty.

      1. Amen to FS re: Driskall’s post. 99.9% of the poor are impoverished through no one’s fault but their own? Come on…I am a superintendent of a school district and let me tell you…..It is not a level playing field, by FAR, starting at a very young age in this country. We have a long way to go as a society in leveling the playing field through education. Driskall has a great story, but is completely out of touch. A shame..

        1. Where I live, Long Island, composed of two counties and 2.5 million people, there are 113 school districts each with a Superintendent and accompaning support staff. Each of those Superintendents makes $200,000 plus. One makes $435,000. Many of the teachers make $100,000 plus. We have some of the highest property taxes in the country. We spend more each year on the schools and the test scores never get higher. We are number 17 in both math and science in the world, yet we spend more per pupil than any other country. Perhaps it is because all our tax dollars do is support the teachers unions, pay the bloated salaries of bureacrats, (113 of them plus staff) and support the Democratic party through the” round and round we go” game they play with the Unions. Our schools are teaching socialism, not math and science, and too many care only for their pension and not the students.

    2. Strike Zero

      No one form of government works – a totally free market with no regulation will run amuck – we are still reeling from the aftermath of our 2008 crash and burn. Conversely, a socialist platform, which does not allow for creativity and innovation will also fail for the reasons you sited. What we need is a blend, a mix of both idiologies. Enough government oversight, to keep the aggressives from defrauding the population; enough freedom to develop new ideas, be creative and to market those ideas with a degree of freedom. Until we get to that point, we will continue to play the yo yo game – up today, down tomorrow

      Also, be advised that there is a significant % of the population that simply CANNOT – not because they are lazy but because they just don’t have what it takes. Richard Driskill brags about his 132 IQ, as if he had something to do with getting it. Where would you be, Richard, if your IQ were 72 or 82. Ponder on that, then think about those poor unfortunates who, through no fault of theirs, have to deal daily with just not being able to GET IT.

      These people are also Humans – albeit that many would like to think they are not. They are part of our society and we should treat them with compassion. A truly interactive government cares for these folks, provides a safety net so they can at lease live a reasonably decent life. Anything less, in my mind is unacceptable.

  114. I often wondered how many income redistribution liberals would sign up for that program if it were being offered on a global scale. Considering the average per capita income go ally is $10-11000, almost everybody in this county is a “1%er”. Something to think about and sk you liberal friends.

  115. Australia is known with its complex tax system. At the state level are imposed payroll taxes, stamp duties on land transfers and other transactions, some taxes on land and properties, fire service taxes, etc. At the local level are imposed some taxes on land and properties.

  116. What jumps out is that you wrote an article filled with statistical facts that don’t take reality into account. At all. It’s totally biased instead of informative. I do like the number tho. Thanks for that part.

    1. Tell me how “statistical facts” don’t take reality into account? Huh?

      Always fight for equality Mike! It’s the best way to go in the end. Say no to discrimination.

  117. It’s basically this, if you are conservative you are Sith. Selfish, evil and crabby. If you are a liberal you’re about the needs of the many and not the needs of the few. Outside of my political line of thinking however RICPR is correct. The rich ship off the poor to die and condemn them for being freeloaders. Lets start a discussion on another forum about that. Here we’re talking about taxes. Samurai only tells a portion of actual taxes paid, either cause he doesn’t know any better or because he’s really trying to push his point of view on others. Then he argue’s that people who work hard for 40 hours are just freeloading cause they make less then other people that work hard for 40 hours. First of all money isn’t life and once you let money define who you are you’re a lost soul. Money isn’t a friend to you.

  118. You asked what jumps out? The concentration on income without counting ALL taxes. Do I think that the info paints a picture? Sure. It gives the impression that the top earners are getting the shaft. What it doesn’t do is make it simple. It seems to me that everyone that politicizes income tax, do not want to do the simple math for fear that the holes in the argument will be too big. Why not show what the percentage of total US taxable income is made by the upper, middle & lower income earners? Why not talk about how much people that are not taxed are paying in other taxes. News flash….income tax is not the only tax. Now dont’ confuse me for some “liberal”. I can’t stand tree huggers & peaceniks. I just call it like I see it. The info I’m talking about is easily obtained. I’m just tired of hearing that people that do not earn enough to pay income tax are somehow worthless freeloaders. These people pay a tax rate of 12% or more in other taxes. They are also the people that line up to defend the rest of us by joining the military at a higher rate than everybody else. I also was one of those people until I obtained a college education. I’m just shocked at the amount of people that buy into the income tax only argument and give left wing nuts Hell for the whole class warfare thing. This is the same. If you are unwilling to count ALL taxes, show who’s earning the money and the reral tax rate per level of income, all you’re doing is talking politics. This is supposed to be based on economics, not who you vote for.

  119. Oliver Goddu

    This author is outrageous. The answer to our deficit is to tax the poor, who should be working harder? I am a business student, about to graduate, and frankly disgusted by the way many people think about the world. Hopefully as young professionals enter the workforce we can begin to clean up the culture. The richest among us are loaded, and expensing their money on the most ridiculous of Items. lets not squeeze the last drops from the bottom 50%, and just pick up the damn tab. I know I am not being elegant, but do you not see the selfish lunacy in this article?

    1. Oliver, as a student, you have no perspective because you are not working and pay no tax. For all we know, your mom and dad are subsidizing your living and tuition. Come back to this article when you start contributing to society.

      I’m not advocating taxing the poor. I’m advocating we ALL pitch in for the good of our nation. If that means just $50 a month in taxes when one is making above poverty wages, so be it. It’s better than nothing, and collectively we can all help our country.

      1. Pretty rude Samurai, why don’t you come back after you’ve paid over 300K
        in income taxes… perhaps you don’t contribute enough?

  120. While clever, your site’s bias is evident. we, by good fortune, and frankly luck, are solidly in the top 20%, not in the top 10% although that could happen.

    Now I grant you, my family has been here a long time. We came as grantees of the Duke of York and Albany after the war with the Dutch. We fought in the Revolution (on both sides btw) and so forth. So, my views may differ.

    However, I do not regret one penny I pay in taxes. I pay what my accountant suggests without question – and I do not bother to itemize, there is really no reason to We make good money, I would not trade my place in life with that of one less fortunate if I could avoid doing so. Why would I therefore begrudge paying my fair share (which is not as you suggest something equivalent in percent to what a poor person should pay, but rather as much as is needed by my government? We live well, why shouldn’t I give more? It is the duty of those to whom, “much is given” to give much in return – in money, in service, in life.

    I am proud to be an America, I’m “blessed” to be among the fortunate in America, and I begrudge not one thing that I give to my country. Those who do, frankly, should leave.

      1. Strike Zero

        The problem we have with this and other similar discourses is that there is no attempt on the part of just about all who are participating in th dialogue, to show even the slightest shred of empathy. We are all so intent on ripping and trearing away at whatever someone else has to say, insofar as it is considered an opposing view. Why can’t we just try to understand the other person’s perspective, make a meaningful comment, if there’s one to be made, without attempting to make “little” of what was said. I applaud you and your accountant for bellying up to the bar. We probably could use more folks like you.

    1. Fermi's Paradox

      “Grantees” meaning you didn’t really earn your top 20% possition?

      I’ve been around a long time in the world of business, professionals and the less fortunate. I don’t recall ever encountering someone as fortunate as you doing it by luck (other than lottery winners). And the same is true for those at the other end of the distribution (other than those who have the bad luck of true disabilities).

      Life in general really isn’t about luck. That view most often leads to disaster.

  121. I’m not in the top 1% but I make a decent living. I do believe that everyone, however, deserve health insurance coverage. I do not understand people who think otherwise. It would meant that America’s taking the lead again and it not bowing to corruption and special interests.

  122. I love the image of the Godlike Obama holding an adorable puppy in front
    of the immortal Abraham Lincoln. Praise God, we are Saved.

  123. Your data’s are all not up to date and was full of mistakes, mr Samurai. The top 1% making only 380.000 USD ? Well, Gates, Limbaugh, Zuckerberg, Brad Pitt, Rockefeller etc they make millions or billions per month, not only $ 380.000… Your top 1% is not the top 1%, but below that (maybe top 10%).
    I have read somewhere the top 1% consisting of Koch, Buffett, Bank of America owners and directors, and the people I mentioned above, made about 40% of total AMerican people’s income (not including the govt income of course). The number 20% of total Americans income is far too little, and since the reccession which hit the top 5% downwards but doesn’t touch the top 1% will make their (top 1%) income percetile share of the reduced whole-AMerica’s incomes to rise (the total diminished, the top 1% stabile, so their % of the total will rise).

    As such a tax of 20% is too little, and see this also : https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/our-unequal-tax-system-in-one-html-table/2012/02/22/gIQAFSGFTR_blog.html

    “About a quarter of the wealthiest Americans, meanwhile, have a lower average tax rate (17.4 percent) than many of those in making far less money.

    What explains the wild variation? Part of it is that some Americans — Mitt Romney is the most famous example — get a sizeable chunk of their income from capital gains, taxed at a lower rate than salaries. There are also a variety of deductions and credits in the tax code that only certain people either can or do take advantage of. In theory, the Alternative Minimum Tax was supposed to even things out, to make sure that higher-income Americans weren’t paying lower taxes. “[B]ut,” the White House report says, “its poor design has caused it to fall primarily on upper-middle-income families from high-tax states, as well as on those with many children.”

    Bruce Bartlett comments that the tax code has become misaligned with basic fairness principles: “We can see, then, that the tax system in the United States violates the fundamental principles of income taxation. Those are ‘vertical equity,’ which says that those with upper incomes should pay a higher effective tax rate than those with modest incomes — as far back as Adam Smith, ability to pay has always been a core principle of taxation — and ‘horizontal equity,’ which says that those with roughly the same income ought to pay roughly the same taxes.”

    Note : Hmmm ……..?? For readers who don’t know other data’s your defense for the top 1% looks sensible, mr Financial Samurai ? Are your bosses in the top 1%, I think so, or maybe top 5%, of course he (they) want his (their) taxes as low as possible with your help here (plus the tax deductions / tax cuts for COMPANIES below 500 employees, which is not a small company like the republicans would it named, as in Indonesia with such a size the company could be an exporter of say, motorcycles assembling plant, and its owner an exporter; whose tax cuts could be to preserve the owners’ own money shielded as the company’s income)

    1. Dude,

      He didn’t mean that everyone in the top 1% makes $380k.

      He meant that $380k is the minimum one has to make to get into the top 1%.

      So, his data is not full of mistakes.

    2. Boelee, you are RIGHT ON THE MONEY. We are upper middle class and although we had enough legal deductions to pay less, the alternative minimum tax brought our taxes up. I don’t get why Romney doesn’t have alternative minimum tax because I know we paid more than 15%, even though we had the deductions.

  124. Its important to realize that this really is only one side to a very complex and important issue. Income inequality is the most vital issue affecting our economy today and it will continue to be a key issue until the problem is solved. We always hear the old liberal saying “The Rich are getting richer while the Poor are getting poorer”; this isn’t just a saying… Its fact. In fact, since the 1980s we’ve seen the top 1%’s income rise by around 500% while the rest of the nation is in stagnation.

    What conservatives fail to realize, is that there is a finite supply of money in an economy at any given time. The argument that the top 1% pay too much is taxes because they already make up 38% of all revenue is actually an argument to the contrary. These guys make so much, that when you tax them at a LOWER tax rate than the rest of us, they STILL account for 38% of the total income tax revenue. It was mentioned above that the bottom 50% should pay an extra $43 a month to help support the economy. That’s absurd. The bottom 50% often have trouble putting food on the table. The bottom 50% have a marginal propensity to consume of 1. If you aren’t familiar with economics that means that for each extra dollar they earn, their consumption increases by $1.00. They are helping the economy by spending all they can spend.

    It makes me sick when conservatives call the wealthy “Job Creators”. Wealthy people do not spend enough of their money on real goods and services to “Create” jobs. Consumers create jobs. A guy working at McDonald’s has a job because of the constant line of cars around drive-thru, not some magical flow of money coming from pockets of the wealth. Trust me, if any corporation was not making money they would not be in business. Consumers create jobs from the bottom up. The people who are REALLY out there creating jobs are the people who spend all they can. That’s unfortunately the lower earning individuals. They don’t set on their money. They spend it. If you really want to boost the economy, and put some people to work, send out a one time payment of $10,000 to each American who makes less than $25,000. The short surge in spending that lasts about a year will create jobs, which will in turn boost total consumption as the new employees are now earning money that they were not earning before. I’m not going to get into the Keynesian multiplier, but an investment like this in the economy, would result in tax revenues far greater than the initial investment.

    On a final note, did you know that the top 10% of earners control 87% of all financial wealth? Do you really think that 13% of the financial wealth, spread unevenly across 90% of the populous is really enough to sustain growth?

  125. There is such an explosive increase in income rates within the top 1% of earners that the “average” of 380k is so misrepresentative it’s practically a falsehood. (Compare the 99th percentile to the 99.9th or 99.99th percentiles, for example — the income growth curve is nearly exponential).

    The rich will always pay “more than their fair share” of taxes because they possess “more than their fair share” of wealth — and the marginal utility (for them) of the nominal amount they pay in taxes is vastly different than the marginal utility of any tax dollars paid by those on the other end of the spectrum.

  126. Payment of FICA taxes is in no way comparable to payment of Income tax. By far the largest portion of FICA is for social security. If you pay into the system, you get some amount of payment out upon retirement. I realize it is not your direct contributions that equate to your retirement payment- but if you don’t pay in- you don’t get $$ out except a bare minimum stipend. So it is good for the ‘poor’ to pay these taxes because they will see a large portion returned to them should they get disabled or when they retire. If someone only had investment income their entire lives, they would not have paid any SS and would get hardly anything upon retirement. The rich are much less likely to rely on Medicare health coverage as well, wheras poor and middle class enroll almost without exception. Again, paying this ‘tax’ results in access to a benefit later in life- so can it really be considered a tax?

  127. So, I’m just finishing up completing my income taxes for 2011.. the only year in which I was supposedly “self-employed” for part of the year (actually a 1099 consultant), which I’m discovering has really screwed me! So I am making substantially less than 1% of what Mitt Romney made in 2011 (he made about 22 million), and yet I am paying over 20% in federal taxes, where he is paying only 15%! And that is what I think is unfair… I get screwed because I was “self-employed”, and he gets a huge tax advantage for having his income in investments. People making over a million should be paying more in taxes…. or at least the same rate I am paying!

      1. Oh yeah, right! Why didn’t I think of that? Reminds me of my 6-year old niece telling me at a race – “next time, if you want to win, just run really fast!!!” Thanks for the advice.

    1. Interesing article but unfortunately you blithely switch between per capita income and AGI per US tax returns and pretend you are making valid comparisons. 75 million of those returns are MFJ (53M) or head of household (22M) returns. This indicates at least a family size of 2 in each return. Since MFJ is about 1/3 of all returns filed- let’s look at a 2 earner household with 2 dependent kids. All the sudden that $114K to get into the top 10% is just 2 spouses earning $57K each, and per capita the household rings in at measly $29K- well below the US per capita.

      Unless you have tax return statistics from other countries, it is a non-sensical comparison from what a ‘tax return’ reports in the US and per capita income in another country.

    2. You don’t get screwed because you are self employed- you just pay 15.3% FICA taxes. Every employee pays the same amount- either directly taken from our paycheck, or paid by employer. If the employer did not have to pay that tax it would be cash to me as employee. Employers look at total cost of employment. It’s just that most people are too dumb to realize we’re getting ‘paid’ 7.65% less because our employer is paying that direct to the government as tax.

  128. Finally, as far as the ‘getting wealth is easy’ deal, that reaks of B.S. If people were mentally capable of exercising that level of self-cotnrol they would, but we live in a world where reality takes precedent over the happy illusions of people who are priveleged and think that anyone can simply pull themselves up by their bootstraps. People who are from wealthy, prosperous, and educated backgrounds have a lot better quote on quote “work ethic.” There is a reason for that. It is because the way we are raised as children affects the way we act and function. I think it is important that you don’t simply assume that having the ability to work harder and longer means that you are putting in more effort and exercising a grreater drive and will. It is totally possible that for somebody who comes from privilege (I don’t just mean income) it is far easier to put in effort than for someone who does not com from privilege.

    1. There is no doubt the wealthy have a comparative advantage to access in things that allow them to do better tutors. Yet, it doesn’t explain the many wealthy successful people who started poor.

      1. Mark Runyan

        I think that any serious look at people has to acknowledge that we are extraordinarily complex in our responses to circumstances. Whether you were poor and from a bad school or wealthy and from a good school is just cutting broad swaths through what is inherented a far more complex issue. Such common indicators of privilege are only the most simplistic step we’ve taken to understand what really goes on in the human mind, what changes and motivates us, how we grow up and form identity. Their are plenty in which social scientists could confidently determine the source of success of a wealthy, successful person who started poor beyond their poverty. Admittedly, their are plenty of ways which we can’t fully explain. I think that thoughtlessly lumping everything we can’t explain that is working well into free will and work ethic is a big mistake though. It reeks to me of belief in an idea without any evidence.

        1. Mark Runyan

          I serious question whether our work ethic and desire are independent variables from the rest of our psyches and experiences. I say this, quite simply, because I believe in neuroscience, physiology, and biology. I believe that work ethic and desire are products of the constants neural systems active in our brains. As such they result from particular conditions and our not something that we can independently switch on or off as we so choose.

  129. “I remember making $550 a month just working at McDonald’s for $3.50/hour, 20 years ago. With wages 3X higher now, I’d be raking in a nice $$1,650 a month or $20,000 a year! Tack on another side job that pays $1,200 a month and I’m in the Top 50%.”

    You say that your working $3.50 an hour for $550 a month. That is 40 hours a week, a full time job. Now your saying you want to add a “side job” that pays $1,200 a month. MORE THAN TWICE YOUR FULL TIME JOB!?!? Alright my friend, you seriously need to return to arithmetic. If that side job was also a $3.50 job, you would have to put in 87 EXTRA hours a week. That is 127 hours A WEEK (interesting, we had a movie called that a few years ago…). In other words, about 18.5 hours a day.

    The Longer Story: Let’s add in the fact that you have to travel between where you work and that you are also young and probably don’t have access to reliable transportaiton and say that you have about thirty minutes of travel between jobs and your home and the fact that you probably don’t have your hours perfectly scheduled together (maybe 9-5, and 7 PM to 5:30 AM). So in other words your at work or traveling between the hours of 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM, 6:30 PM and 6 AM. That leaves you 2.5 hours between 6-8:30 AM and an hour between 5:30-6:30 to: 1) sleep, 2) take care of hygiene, 3) prepare for work and such, 4) relax and put your head on straight, 5) take care of family issues, 6) work on taxes and other bureaucratic contingencies, 7) eat and prepare food, 8) shop.

    The chance that that lifestyle is humanly feasible is so close to zero I can’t even describe it. Your pants are on fire my friend.

    1. Oh, and I forgot to mention doctors appointments and emergencies. You’d also have to find time for that if you had health care.

      1. Mark Runyan

        Your right, I seem to have missed that part. Props. I suppose in that case, you’d be working a little less than 3/4 of the 40 hours a week (using your $1650 data that you stated). In that case, it is 70 hours a week and ten hours a day plus all the extra challenges forementioned. Your argument may hold water in that case.

        1. Mark Runyan

          That would give an extra 17 hours to our hypothetical per week. Two and a half hours more per day. That could leave him with 5.5 hours rather than 3.5 hours where he isn’t busy traveling to sleep, do chores, and run his life, with all the thing mentioned above. I’m sure it is humanly possible. It just doesn’t sound like an option that is feasible for even your best, hard working, average Joe.

  130. The arguments here really shouldn’t be about whose paying what taxes, it should be about what the people we have elected to our government are doing with those funds. If the governement was running a balanced budget and there was no talk of what they needed to do to fix a non exsistent problem then we all wouldn’t be so interested in what our neighbors are or are not paying.

    I’ve seen it from all sides. As a couple with no child for 17 years I resented having only a deduction for myself and my husband when our neighbors with 7 children got all those deductions. But which family was using up more of our resources putting wear and tear on our roads and our system? Then, due to a life altering change I actually had to become part of the population that needed assistance, which I believe serves it’s purpose for a short time for those in need of help to find their way back to being productive, not as a “give me and give me more if I have more children”. Fortunately I was finally blessed with a child, a wonderful life and now 23 years later I have worked my “—” off to be able to say that this year we’re in the 5% and by next year hoepfully the 1%.

    I don’t mind paying more taxes because I make more and that is a much better place to be. What I do mind is a government that hasn’t read Dave Ramsey and how to buy and pay for things only when the money is in that envelope and stop using a charge card that doesn’t belong to them but to the people they so terribly represent. And for anyone who complains about any upper %’s not paying their dues I would find it hard to believe that the majority of our high income earners were born into it. So, whether they own a business, run a business, work a physically demanding job or sit at a desk they must have done something to get there and for me that has been years of studying and practicing the art of trading equity options and the fruits of my long hours have paid off so well I am in awe. I also wonder how many people complaining about who pays what taxes, spent a fortune on mega millions tickets last week. We all should be grateful that we live in this great nation but we need to pull together and stop the bleeding if we want it to stay great. Enough said. My wishes for everyone is a prosperous, safe and healthy year.

    1. I can agree to an extent, but the underlying issue is that we’re ALL great big hypocrites; you included. We can only see through our own self-absorbed lens, and that perspective is narrow and weak. America has been on top of the global “heap” for decades, which means we have that much farther to fall when the system buckles under its eroding foundation.
      Of course we all dislike the government taking our hard-earned tax dollars and giving it away to seemingly dubious causes. But, we also don’t want to acknowledge the costs of our own addictions.
      Take our military for instance. I am sure few Americans would disagree with the notion that the US is presently the lone “superpower” in this world. Sure, but at what cost? We spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. Do we need 800 bases in 150 countries for “national security” ? How well did that work for the British Colonies, or the Roman Empire, for that matter? How about maintaining roads and infrastructure and air travel safety and border / port security? Who do we look to if a pandemic were to break out in our country?
      Reading your post has me detecting a mildly racial tone, describing the baby-making and lottery ticket-buying assertions. I would ask you to consider what this mother of 7 would do without those deductions? Would your community be a better place in any way if she wasn’t afforded assistance? Do you feel you are somehow subsidizing her, or putting food on her table? You have to give up on that mentality, because that is in essence of a complex society.. Like it or not. Be proud that you are a bread-winner, and take comfort that this economically unbalanced system allows you to earn well, and that the great majority of what you do make is yours to spend as you choose.

  131. Brandyn powell

    The numbers don’t add up if u take the time to do the numbers yourself you will see that if your in the bottom 50 well lets say the 78ottom 25 the people who need the most help u pay a8out 5% more then the top 50 people and it shouldn’t be like that did u no there is a person well more then 1person that could pay the whole usa’s debt and still stay in the top 50% makes no sence. God bless america cuz america our shit is all ass backwards…..

    1. Cnile Senior

      Brayden….

      Check to be sure you are not “fat fingering” the numbers into your calculator.

      The national debt including internal borrowing from the SS fund is in excess of the GDP.

      That says if the government confiscated EVERY SINGLE PENNEY that EVERYONE made, it would not cover the debt.

  132. The other thing not captured here is how many of the “bottom” 50% work in jobs where it is easy to not or at least under report their income. I for a fact know that most Cab drivers do not report accurate income totals as most of their receipts are in cash, what about service industry employees? strippers? hookers? drug dealers? pimps? valets?

  133. cliff wernet

    You guys are idiots when it come to tax distribution. How can you expect the bottom 50% of wage earners to pay an equal share of taxes compared to the top 5 and 1 percent. How would they afford to buy all the things that the top earners want to sell them. You all know that top earners get other benifits that lower income earners do not get. Top wage earners use more tax dollars to supprt their life styles and business. Most of the comments above seem to be from people who do not really know any struggling fammilies. You assume that they are all sitting at home drinking and watching TV. Who can live on $30,000 a year and expect to save money to retire or really own anything. They all will be being supported by our goverment at some time or another unless we invest in our future. That takes taxes. How many of the top 10% went to college using government money? It is often the same. Once I get mine why should I help anyone esle. You parents used goverment money to get where they are. Anyone in the military got tax dollors that we all paid. If you want to lower the deficet, then do real work and get private money out of our government. Once the deck is not stacked the deficit will go down faster than you can imagine.

  134. I used to work at mcdonalds and i sure as hell didnt make 20,000 a year! not even close to 20,000 before taxes, and i worked full time with the occasional overtime. Just saying, I am greatfull I live in america, and that I can complain about having just enough to get by on. alot of the world is worse off.

  135. @Shawn Marie
    that is your CHOICE to have a child. The real elephant in the room with this article is the losers who had to get loaded every Fri. Who spent every dollar they made on “spinners”, drugs, alcohol, video games. Who made fun of the nerds and accepted the job as a roofer because their parents finally kicked them out. Most people are not ambitious “self starters”. The NON-WHINERS in my life I can count on one hand.

  136. What many people don’t understand is that the economy is NOT a fixed pie. The wealthy are NOT getting wealthier at the expense of someone else. If you want more pie, then go bake some more pie.

    If a farmer in a villiage developed a technology to increase crop production, sold it to farmers and in the process made millions, who is worse off in this situation? The answer is “no-one”. Farmers sold more crops and made more money, the people were able to afford the food due to the increased supply, and the entrepaneur made millions.

    1. That’s a nice hypothetical. Unfortunately the reality is that high stakes gambling/speculation by irresponsible people using other peoples money created tidy short term gains at the cost of crippling the economy. Globalization has also decimated the domestic supply chains (salaries, purchasing power, tax base, etc.).

      The top tier earners have increased their margins at the expense of everyone else.

      You guys really need to step back from the theory and ideology and look at what is really happening.

      The farmer ‘innovation’ argument is naive at best.

      1. Charles- your are wrong about many things. I’m a “top tier” earner. I did it by putting myself through college, paying my student loans and working many long hours taking care of other people. I didn’t steal money from anyone. My home value plummeted along with lots of other peoples. My staff gets paid well and even gets bonuses a few times a year. When we meet our goals and exceed them, all of our employees get paid more because it means they were all working hard to make it happen. So your argument about “increased margins at the expense of everyone else is BS”.

        Your first paragraph is also nonsense as you left out an important piece of the meltdown- millions of people bought homes they could not afford to buy and they knew it! They signed up for adjustable mortgages at low intro rates (which of course was the fault of someone else) and then ran the minute the intro rate was over. They had people making 50k a year buying 600k homes! My lawn guy had 4 homes at one point. His plan was to “flip” them all (like everyone else)….that is a risk he never should have taken. Just because my husband and I do very well, why should we cover people that made bad choices? It’s time people start taking responsibility for their own actions or inaction and quit blaming the government and the evil “toppers”. They should be thankful they are “poor” in this country and not like the real poor in Africa, the middle east or eastern europe.

        1. Obviously you have a horse in this race – and I can hear the rehearsed arguments. Most I actually agree with – but that still doesn’t change the situation. My first paragraph is of course NOT nonsense. Irresponsible financial speculation (by the people trusted as financial stewards) has had a massive negative impact on the economy, as has globalization and the outsourcing of the supply chain. Both of these have led to increasing top tier income disparities. This isn’t some kind of ideological speculation. Its just a fact. I totally agree that individuals at all levels of society irresponsibly took on debt which created artificial demand bubbles that we can still hear popping.

          So while I agree that the middle/lower classes are also responsible for their ‘addiction’, we all know that its the pusher that made it happen. Just think of it as an illicit drug. The big financial cartels envisioned financial products that could be easily afforded and consumed by the people, and would make them feel ‘high.’ They authorized production and distribution and raked in the profits. They went to incredible lengths to ‘launder’ the profits by creating esoteric financial instruments that would dilute their risk, and create another market segment of institutional and sovereign buyers for their toxic debts. And the ultimate beauty was that they got gov’ts to cover the bets when things started to unravel.

          But the bottom line is someone has to pay back into the system to ‘right the ship’, and since you can’t get blood from a stone, the folks with money need to step up and help fix things. Many citizens are called on to sacrifice their lives. This is a real threat to the country. Fed Debt/Fed Income is 600%. Total US debt/Total income is around 380%.

          Don’t hyperbolize and imagine I am proposing that all of your money be confiscated. We should simply return to historic precedent and impose wartime/postwar level taxes as a guideline, and adjust as conditions permit to balance the budget and begin paying down the debt. The cost to you of not doing it will be much greater.

        2. Exactly!!!! Why cover all the bad choices of the businesses the government bailed out???????? Its survival of the fittest. No one should be bailed out. Not big business, not small business, not poor children that had no choice where they were born, or what type of parents they have. Come on people. Yes, I worked 40 hours a week and went to school at night to get a degree. But when I got the degree and the better paying job, I did not give away my heart and sense of charity. We are at a time where we, who worked hard to get where we are now, and those who’s past generations worked hard to get them where they are now; need to look at the big picture, to have pride in our country, and try to fix it. Not blame or be hateful. Yes, it’s not fair. I understand that. But if we can afford to “help” fix it, we should. It’s our country. Not the top 1%’s country. Not the bottom 50%’s country. If you are asking the bottom 50% to give up 43$ a month, then so can I. That means if everyone gave $43 a month it would double the benefit right? So if the bottom 50 has to give up luxuries like meat every night, or an occasional six pack of beer and box of cigarettes , then the top 50 can give up a golf game, or a dinner out? I play golf by the way, and I can give a up a game a month and guess what is actually $68!! That’s more than $43!!! Yay!!!!!

  137. @Anita
    I think your view of desk jobs is a little skewed to say the least. I’ve done both the demanding physical job, and the ‘supposed to be 40 hours a week’ desk job making the bigger money. They are both equally demanding in drastically differing ways.

    I’m a classic cliche in that I put myself through school waiting tables. I worked five nights a week from 5 to midnight (later on fridays and Saturdays) and went to school full time during the days. The job was physically and emotionally demanding, and at times down right degrading, but worth every penny.

    Now I work at a desk job in a cubicle. I’m at work by 7:30, and hardly ever leave before 6 p.m. Its far away from a physically demanding job, but mentally and emotionally… the stress is greater than waiting tables EVER was. My husband and I work our asses off (at our ‘cushy’ desk jobs) to put ourselves in the top 5% and happily pay our share of taxes…

    I think that’s fair.

    1. There really is something to be said about the mental and emotional tolls of a desk job. I for one believe a difficult desk job due to whatever reason can be far more dangerous for one’s health long term.

  138. It’s easy to see the point of view that you’re coming from.

    However, to ask those who can’t afford food to pay Federal Income taxes is kind of crazy. To top that off, you’re comparing those making less in a year than the average top 1%’er makes in approximately 3 weeks. That’s a pretty big difference.

    Those in the top 1% are not struggling. Most own several different luxury vehicles, own several homes, and have millions saved for a retirement nest egg. Meanwhile, the bottom 50% are losing their homes (or could never afford one in the first place), have a hard time affording to buy food, and are barely getting by.

    This coming from a middle-class earner who can at least understand that the wealth gap is greater than in any other country in the world in the last few centuries. I would hate to see America turn into a serf society, though I fear it already has.

    1. Have you ever been to the middle east or eastern Europe? Your assessment of the gap between our rich and poor compared to what it was in the past and to other countries is shows your ignorance on the matter.

      1. You are proving his point. Your only argument is that – ‘hey, we aren’t a third world country’ is pretty weak.

        Compared to wealthy developed countries (keep in mind that we are the worlds largest economy), we have a radical disparity between rich and poor, and it is getting worse every year.

  139. What would be the point of having welfare recipients and food stamp recipients paying more taxes? The money would literally go straight back to them because they would be making less to the eyes of the government. The rich paying more taxes is a way to keep the middle class strong, because a strong middle class is a sign of a strong economy. If the middle class is growing, then things are looking up. If the middle class begins to shrink, the economy is weakening. The middle class does the spending and mediating between the poor and the wealthy. Most people have to be in the middle class. Not everyone can be executives we only need a few people to steer and its a fact of life that most people have tio do the work. It would also be inconvenient for the poor to be dying in the streets. (Certainly for them) since the very wealthy make much more than they nerd to survive, they don’t need the extra money. And if the fortunate ones want more money. Work more and earn more. But don’t take any money out of the hands and mouths of the people below you.

    Just to assay any assumptions you may gather from reading this. I am not a recipient of any aid. But I have seen poverty and that should be inflicted on no one. I am a hard worker. I currently am attending school full time and working 35 hours a week. I do nothing but school and work because the reward at the end will ne worth it. I don’t aspire for more money than I could possibly spend in one lifetime and I value charity, even tough I make a small amount a month I give more than 10% of my income.

    1. How about the point of giving welfare recipients pride and a way out? Might be incentivizing.

      Once you work full-time, and work for about 10 years, I think your views will be more for equality and having everybody pitch in above the poverty line.

    2. I’m so sick of this argument about people that can’t pay even $1 into the IRS pot. SInce we have about 180 million people that file taxes and pay nothing….if they each put in $1 that would be another $180 million! Since we know that won’t happen (even though many of them can afford beer, cigs, a trip to the nail salon, fake hair, nikes or what ever), they could spend time “volunteering” to make up for their inability to pay. They could help clean up their kids school, pick up trash in their neighborhood, clean police cars, or do something to help their own communities. I’m sure you will view that as demeaning or the like…..well I find it demeaning that my husband and I pay so much in taxes and then get battered by people like you that what we pay is never enough.

  140. Cnile Senior

    With federal, state, and local debt totaling more than $26 Trillion, and personal debt (including mortgages) is more than $14 Trillion, I wonder if there really ever was a “middle class”.

    It appears the middle class was just propped up by debt. There is actually just the rich and the poor, as there has always been since economies where first established.

  141. Why doesn’t Mr. Buffet pro-actively pay more Fed taxes…. heck, he doesn’t have to wait for a mandate from the Feds, does he?

    Also, it might be nice if his company would pony up that $1B in taxes they are fighting so diligently….. Interesting to say the least.

    However, I STRONGLY disagree that anyone living in this country be absolved from even paying $1 in Federal “revenue”. Absolutely freaking crazy and ridiculous that 50% of the population pays 100% of the tax burden and something that CANNOT be supported for any duration of time (check out most of Europe… Greece, Spain to name a few countries).

    If you could ALL please focus on the real issue of throwing welfare dollars AT the problem instead of AT the solution…. People do want jobs and a paycheck instead of a welfare check, for the most part. We need to lift people up out of poverty and help them gain a footing to support themselves, long-term. Continuing on as we are and growing the welfare base is the ruin of our nation!

    1. According to this chart, the bottom 50% only makes 12.75% of the money and still manages to pay 2.7% of all the federal taxes. Do you really think that’s the best place to start looking for money? Maybe you should worry more about corporate welfare than at social welfare aimed at poor children.

    2. Cnile Senior

      Tammy…

      Welfare is a small price to pay to keep “those people” out of our neighborhoods.

      As long as we give them pittance in welfare, they will never be able to afford the good life as we know it.

  142. @Sam – I assume you mean that we should raise taxes on everyone since you think it is unethical to vote to raise taxes on someone else and not on yourself. Correct?

  143. I really appreciate you posting the numbers. When I tried to imagine how we might grapple with the deficit and debt it seemed impossible. Now it is clear that this is all quite manageable.

    The may be many different formulas we could use, but to illustrate a simple solution, taxing the top 5% agi at 50% would completely erase the budget deficit.

    There.

    Done.

    Next question?

      1. I saw your point above about $43 per month and some tens of billions in extra revenue. Paltry, but fine. Let each citizen pay according to ability as long as there are reasonable accommodations for subsistence. How about education, healthcare, and some sort of retirement savings? I just think the people at the very bottom are already living hand to mouth and there just isn’t much you can squeeze from them.

        The wealthier in society can afford to pay more during this time of national distress (top rates usually rise during/after wars anyway). The super rich can pay A LOT more. Lets just run the numbers and adjust the rates and balance the budget. This is totally doable.

        1. Why don’t you pawn your computer and send the proceeds to the IRS, that could help cover some of the deficit too!

    1. Cnile Senior

      Charles….

      The point you are missing is that the top 5% are ALREADY PAYING from 15% to 36%. If you increased the rate on all of them to 50%, it would only bring in an ADDITIONAL $357 Billion. The defecit for 2012 is $1.3 Trillion. By raising the rates for those NOW PAYING between 15% and 36%, up to 50% for all of the top 5% would not cover a third of the deficit.

      1. OK. That’s a fair point to finesse the argument, but its not a rebuttal. The top 5% are probably paying nearer the low end of what you mentioned, meaning there is another 25-35% of that 3 trillion that could be tapped. That is huge. Maybe raise the rates up to 90% for the 1%. Raise the rates on the top 20% or earners as well. The main point is, we can increase taxes to tackle this issue, that those at the top want to pretend is an insurmountable challenge.

        Let’s cut spending, and radically raise taxes on the wealthy that while causing no harm, would resolve the fiscal crisis.

        We can do this.

        Then, once we are actually paying our way, we use our democratic leverage to really prioritize spending. Deficit spending should be for catastrophic emergencies or sometimes structural investments. It should never ever ever be used to pay ongoing expenses.

        1. Cnile Senior

          Second: Taxation is the most effective form of social engineering. Texas is the benefactor of California’s confiscatory rates.

          Costa Rica boasts that more than 30% of it’s population consists of of wealthy citizens from US, Europe, and Japan. Costa Rica, Brazil, and other SA countries realize that the wealth of the counrty depends on the wealth of it’s people.

          If you hate rich folks, just raise their taxe rates to 90% and they will be gone overnight.

      2. Well I’m not sure what you propose as an alternative. We need to actually pay for what we spend. If you look at historic tax rates – especially during and after times of war, they are much closer to what I am proposing. Yet somehow you call this hate?!? Maybe it is just that you are ridiculously greedy and selfish and hate your country? Think about it. People sacrifice their lives for this country but when it comes to paying what is perfectly normal and logical tax rates given the fiscal context and historical precedent, you cry foul and threaten to leave? This is the perfect picture of panicked greed from ill gotten wealth.

        The wealthy would be paying a smaller amount relatively if they hadn’t participated in the insidious looting and pillaging of the middle class. They are being asked to pay more now because its necessary, and by their design they are the only ones making much of anything beyond subsistence these days. The numbers are clear enough.

      3. I’m not sure why you are assuming anyone hates the rich. The country needs money and they have it all. Let’s balance the budget by increasing taxes to historical wartime/postwar norms, and right the fiscal ship that under their stewardship was driven into the rocks (while their wealth increased).

        1. Cnile Senior

          The 1950’s was a different era. This is a global economy, and global economics abhors confiscatory taxes and massive regulations.

          Ask yourself – if your state charged $50,000/year for auto tags, how many people would own cars in your state? Better yet, how many people would move to another state?

        2. Cnile Senior

          I’m sure you will never understand the economics of the fair market. So I won’t even try. Your answer will always be 100% “tax the wealthy”, when it should be at least 80% “cut the rediculous spending”.

          FYI: I spent 15 months in Viet Nam, and 22 months in the Naval Medical at Bethesda, MD.

      4. “global economics abhors confiscatory taxes and massive regulations”

        You speak in cliches and generalities. Taxes are higher in other developed countries. And fewer regulations? Perhaps you have never lived or worked abroad, and you read that somewhere on the internet? Its almost funny to hear the ‘we need fewer regulations’ mantra after the financial collapse. We definitely need more and better regulations.

        Moving to a 3rd world country is not quite the same as moving from NY to NH.

        Don’t worry. I’m sure you will do fine. If you really think the business, social, and political climate in central america is better – then no one will stop you.

        1. @ cnile – so now its a ‘fair’ market and not a ‘free’ market? I totally agree that we need to limit and reduce spending as a big part of the solution. But you seem like someone who is all about repeating tired cliches and ideologies. We do not live in a free market. We do not live in a fair market. It is skewed. Money buys politicians. Politicians spend literally trillions to bail out failed ‘free and fair market’ ventures. Poor regulations allow for clever people to game the system and rake in massive short term gains that are beyond absurd, while at the same time destroying the system that made them wealthy. It is slash and burn business. And they have no accountability. In a truly free and fair system, their heads would roll – literally.

          I’m not saying its the worst system or even a bad system, but it could certainly use huge improvements. Taxing people at levels to match their spending is so obvious I can’t believe its even being debated. The only people you can really tax to solve the problem are the ones with money – preferably money that isn’t required for basic food and shelter. I agree even low income people should pay some symbolic amount. Once we are paying for what we buy, then some market mechanisms will come into play and we will prioritize spending.

          Right now tax cuts for the rich are being financed by future generations. Is that free and fair lol???

  144. If the over $1,000,000 earners would just pay the 35% that they are suposed to that would solve owr problems entirely. If $43/month from the bottom 50% is all we need as you state. How easy is it for the top 10% to give an extra $1000 a year. And why don’t you mention that the real taxes paid by the top 5% are lest than 15% because most of there money is in capital gains. Real Fair!!!

    1. Because the real tax rate paid by the top 5% is 25% and many times is higher.

      Don’t confuse the top 0.1% who earn millions from dividends and capital gains at 15% like Mitt and Warren.

    2. Why should we have to pay more so those who pay nothing can continue to do so? People like you are a major problem in this country. When is enough enough? Your quick to want to take money from me and my family, why don’t you financially cover the people who pay nothing? My husband and I paid over 140k to the IRS last year. How much more is our fair share? Your thought process is dangerous.

      1. @ Melanie – I couldn’t agree with you more. I can’t stand these people who say, “Just give us X amount more money from your pocket, it won’t hurt you!” Why should we give even MORE than we already pay? They sound like lazy, uneducated beggars… and surely, even if given their precious entitlement, they would in time, simply go back to being lazy beggars. It’s human nature.

        1. Imagine a world where the welfare system is funded by donation only, instead of forced upon us by taxes… Let’s see how many liberal minded people are also liberal with their wallets? Hypocrites.

          Scenario: A classroom where all the kids are given chocolate coins everytime they do a good deed like clean the whiteboard or help a friend, and every hour they save their coin they get another coin; but if a child bullies another child for more coins the bully will be punished and have his coin taken away…

          The kids that eat their coins immediately or try to bully other kids will eventually have none. Is if fair to force all the kids who saved up their coins patiently and did good deeds, to give half their coins to the kid who has none, simply because “they have more coins”?

          And if the kid who didn’t save his coins and ate it from the beginning, got half of all the coins, he’d probably just tell himself, “Why should I have to be good and save, when all the other kids who have chocolate coins will end up having to hand it to me in the end?”

  145. The one thing I don’t like about the table is the “Number of returns with a positive adjusted Gross Income” column.

    So I make 50k/year, taking a standard deduction I get dropped to 25-30k AGI then I get taxed on that.
    I think I worked out one time that on average over the past 10 years I am paying about 8% total Federal income tax.

    What I want to know is what the average total income is, then what the deductions are.
    I had a boss that decided that since he drove it around to customer sites from time to time, his Corvette was a write off. According to tax code it is (at least a % of it). Giant elaborate conference table – write off. Vacation, if done right, another write off. I don’t begrudge him or anyone having luxuries, what I don’t like is when, through creative manipulation of tax codes, they end up paying a lot less than their fair share. Granted, not everyone does get this break, but it sure seems as though the more you make the more creative you can be, the less total % you pay. I don’t buy the AGI. I want to see the before deduction income.

    Solution: Personal income tax. 1 deduction for every tax payer. A tax payer is anyone making more than (say 20k a year, about the bare minimum to survive) You get to deduct 20k. You buy a house….Good for you. Have kids? congratulations. Donate to a charity? Hope that warm and fuzzy feeling you got was worth it. Still no additional deductions.
    So if you make less than 20k a year you pay 0 taxes. (can’t get blood from a turnip).
    If you make $20,001 that year? Well then you pay X% on $1.00 (Lets put x=10%)
    if you make 200,000 a year, Well then you are paying 10% on 180k.

    The more you make the closer to 10% you pay. Yes it is a “progressive” tax, but it sure seems to be the most fair in my opinion.

    There are a few things I don;t know about, Say you make 30k but hubby only made 19k…
    Not sure how to handle this, but I think hubby deduct 20k (pays no taxes) and you pay 1k.
    So in essence no joint returns.

    I have also entertained the idea of a 1% flat tax on ALL income to businesses, regardless of profit or loss. No write offs…period. So if you want to pay extra to be in a particular part of town then that is a business decision you live with. If you want to buy a Lear jet, then if status really means that much to you, then go for it – but no write off.

    Issues I have are what about the mining company that has to buy $10 million pieces of equipment, or Apartment building owners, or the Limousine company? Not too sure how to handle that since being able to deduct those expenses probably are the only thing keeping them in business.

      1. I am assuming you kidding about your last statement. Otherwise, in your world, that would mean that anyone earning under 20K (including the husband in your example) couldn’t vote? How about: the more you make, the greater number of votes you have? (Isn’t that how influence peddling works now?)

      2. YES! I think if you have no skin in the game you get no vote. People forget the lessons of our parents and grandparents- you are more likely to cherish and care for something that you paid for yourself or created yourself vs something given to you. Prime example: look at schools in poor neighborhoods; they are covered in graffiti, kids destroy books, treat staff horribly, and don’t bother to show up. If their parents actually had to pay for it, the schools would be in much better shape and so would the staff!

        1. @Melanie – your idea that “if you have no skin in the game you get no vote” makes no sense at all. Look at Romney – he paid a 15% effective tax rate on his income of $20million or however much it was, compared to people making much less paying 25% or more. But you can’t fault Romney for that.. that’s all he was legally required to pay. By the same token, if someone is making so little that they are not required to pay taxes, how can you take away their right to vote? You’ll find in that category, elderly people who have paid taxes all their lives, as well as many who fought in the military for your freedom… and because they now are on a fixed income and pay no taxes, you would take away thier right to vote? Or someone who has worked and paid taxes for years but has recently been laid off and is surviving on unemployment. You would take away thier right to vote? Really???

  146. AFTER READING ARTICLE COMMENTS I HAVE A FEW THINGS TO SAY:
    CONGERESS: TERM LIMITS AND RESPONDSIBILITY CLAUSES

    TAXES: WHEN BILLS ARE PASSED FOR PARTICULAR REASONS/ PRISON TERMS FOR
    MISAPROPIATIONS OF FUNDS.

    GOD: WHEN SOCIETY HAS A MORALE BELIEF SYSTEM AND VALUES. SUCESSFUL GOVERNMENT WILL PREVAIL.

    WE HAVE TALKED TO LONG, VOTE, CREATE GROUPS WITH SAME IDEALS AND PRESENT YOUR IDEALS. ACTION IS WHAT THE REQUIREMENT DESERVES NOT IDEALISTIC MEMOIRS

  147. Looks like Romney may have shot himself in the foot. Forget about the fact that he is only paying an approximately 15% effective rate on however many millions he made that year (mostly capital gains). I think his big mistake was his offhand comment that he also made some regular income from speeches, but “not very much” he said with a laugh. So, it turns out that “not very much” was 374K for 9 speeches. So, doing the math… in one speech, he made more than the average American makes for a whole year, and yet he considers it “not much”. Just shows how out of touch with reality all these guys are!!

  148. Grace Howard de Castillo

    If I buy a property with a $100,000 to 200,000 us. value, how much taxes will I pay?

    Thank you kindly.

    1. It depends where you buy the property and if it’s your primary residence or an investment property.

  149. If we wanna TALK ABOUT FAIR!!!!!!!!!!!!! LETS REQUIRE EVERYONE TO EARN THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT HOURLY OR BY SALARY THEN CHARGE THEM 20% SO WE CAN REALLY MAKE IT FAIR. MORONS. It’s not fair that some people work their butts off a thousand times harder making minimum wage and someone who just sits down all day in a cubical can make 50,000 a year. Let’s talk about fair here. It’s never going to be fair and G-d says it rains on the just and the unjust and when the PHARISEES complained about taxes owed to Ceaser Jesus said “You fools give to what is Ceasers and give to G-d what is G-d’s” In other words give to the governement what is the governement and stop complaining!!!!!

      1. I think what Anita is addressing is your claim that it is not “fair” that you and the rest of the top 1% are paying a greater % in taxes. I think she is saying that life is not always fair…. that a lot of people in jobs that are important to us are never going to make the kind of money you make. A lot of people are just as smart or smarter than you and worker just as hard or harder than you, but are not making the amount of money you make because of the kind of job it is. And their job may be the perfect job for them as far as what they enjoy, or are good at, etc. (For example, teachers are very important. We NEED good teachers, but we are never going to pay them $380K to do their job.) Whether that is “fair” or not, it’s just how it is. And you may not think it is “fair” that you have to pay more taxes, but that’s just how it is.

  150. Taking a cue from this article, I feel sorry for occupy protesters. Time badly spent, they could have done better by improving their skills during the time they occupied. Its not hard to be rich, you need to be hardworking, and you need to use your brain in a better way.

    Whoever is against this theory, a simple question, why the rich can and you can’t?

  151. AGI isn’t the perfect measure of income. A lot of income such as Social Security and tax exempt interest isn’t taxed. This distorts the numbers especially re income thresholds, senior citizens, and the bottom of the chart.

    Also, the chart lists tax returns, not people. Let’s say Taxpayer A is married filing joint with $500G and a stay at home spouse. Lets say Taxpayer B lives with Taxpayer C and each files single making $250G. Each household has $500G, but who is in the 1% per the chart?

    1. What difference does it make? Team A and Team B both make over $500,000.

      You can nitpick the stats forever, but this sample set is as good as it gets! Perfect is an illusion!

  152. Guy’s we don’t have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem. We need to throw out all of the incumbents in congress, maybe they’ll get the message that we’re not going to take it anymore. Government is bloated with all the losers who couldn’t compete for a job in the real world(Tattooed, body piercings,etc. Jersey Shore types). The funny thing is that the losers make a hell of a lot MORE then their counterparts, whom by the way are paying their salaries( this is the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard). I’m a small business owner and I have to pay for families healthcare, which costs $1,600 a month, that’s more than half of the income the Top 50% earn. Meanwhile the government just keeps raising the bar for the SO CALLED POVERTY Limit. If you’re below the poverty line you get free housing, food, healthcare, cell phone, child care, etc. Those that need it, should get it. Those that want a free lunch, put them to work cleaning the streets!!! Cut the Federal Government by 20%, and you’ll see how quickly our deficit will decrease.

  153. Serious Dude

    I just stumbled across this website, and am acutely aware of the possibility of miscommunication. So my question is this: Is this article a joke? Seriously.

  154. Warren Buffet and anybody else who claims to be under-taxed may visit pay.gov and give all they want.

    But next time somebody says they pay too little, ask if they itemize deductions?

  155. I’d like to understand how anyone could expect a person to pay income tax when he or she is spending 100% of disposable income on necessities (i.e. food, shelter, medical expenses).

  156. Wah-wah. I have two loaves of bread under my arms. If I try to give you a slice, I may drop one of them.

  157. There are a wide variety of people who are the 1%, from people who live solely off of investments to those, who like the previous post, have to work extra hard.

    Those of us who are better off often have the ability to write off some of our income. For example, I get a tax break for my student loans and for my mortgage interest charges. These write offs amount to money lost by the feds. At some level, I could consider these to be “entitlements.”

    People in lower income levels do not have these types of write offs. So, the feds give them EIC. That doesn’t make me upset in the least. Many low income people’s AGI is the same (or nearly so) as their gross income. Seems fair to me: I get a write off, they get something similar.

    All in all, I do not buy into using AGI as the best method for comparisons. I prefer using wealth (defined as assets minus liabilities) as a means to compare. I believe that when we use that method, things look a bit more equitable than the method used in this article. At the same time, I have seen numerous methods used to explain all this. Each method carries with it its own strengths as well as its own weaknesses.

    My bottom line is this: a society is not infinitely sustainable unless the individual is willing to give up some freedom for the benefit of the whole. As someone who lives in the top 20%, I think I have it much better than the bottom 20% and I have no problem allowing a portion of my income to go toward them. No problem at all.

    As a side note, I really appreciate that the writer actually responds to many of these comments! Thank you.

  158. you’re referring to the mega-rich. I pay 35% taxes and all of my payroll taxes, and we are taxed for all monies that are retained by our business as ordinary income. It is very difficult. Most of us in the 1% are barely there, and are taxed to death. for 2009 our business was 180K in the hole, 2010 we made that up but after paying our vendors we had to pay tax on that 180K that we owed to vendors, that isn’t money in our pocket but we are taxed on it anyhow. That’s $63,000 taxation on money we never had. Don’t get delusional that that is all earnings in our pocket. Most of our earnings although taxable go to hiring more employees, or for equipment, or held for future hard times, so we don’t have to let employees go. So next time you want to complain that business owners are saving money………….that’s right! I’m trying to save my employees jobs, which I can’t do if I have nothing saved up for them in slow times. YET it is still taxable. Get a grip

      1. Yes, of course companies don’t hire if there isn’t a demand, but it is just as important to hold on to your employees when demand is low, as all companies have an eb and flo.

  159. The author of this article has not taken marginal utility into consideration, which is a typical oversight from almost all conservative economists and politicians. Specifically, the marginal utility of the dollar.

    While the rich pay disproportionately more tax dollars than the middle class, and a higher percentage of taxes on ordinary income (setting aside capital gains for a minute), conservatives don’t understand that the burden of U.S. taxes is still substantially higher on, for example, a pizza delivery boy than a corporate CEO making $250,000+. That is because any given person doesn’t value all of the dollars in the bank the same. Dollars going toward primary needs (food, clothing, shelter) are highly valued by anyone, dollars going to secondary needs (automobiles, household appliances, etc.) are slightly less valued, dollars going to tertiary needs even less valued, etc.

    Thus, a 20% tax on a guy who can barely afford to make ends meet is a much greater tax imposition than an 50% tax on a guy who is making $250,000+ a year. With a 5% tax hike, the first guy may no longer afford to be able to put milk on the table, while the second guy may not afford to buy his eighth Ferrari.

    When you factor in marginal utility into the equation, it is clear that the rich in America, even though they play disproportionately more tax dollars than the middle and poor classes, and even though they may pay (setting aside capital gains for a momen) a larger percentage of their income than the middle and poor classes–they are actually undertaxed.

    Conservatives often will say that the tax rates on corporations in the US is higher than any other country in the world. They often fail to point out that revenues from corporations in the U.S. is also the highest.

    More importantly, the effective tax rate for the wealthiest in this nation has decreased over the last decade, commensurate with our national increase in unemployment.

    This is exactly why the “across the board” tax cuts implemented by Bush (and to his discredit, carried by Obama) were so devastating to this country. It treated every company the same, when in fact there is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequals. Companies are not all the same, their valuation of dollars differ based on their supply of capital. Lots of small business are struggling and are overtaxed, but lots of large businesses are raking in millions of dollars a year.

    Since the rich pay most of the tax “dollars”, even a small tax cut to the upper 1% of income earners translates into massive budgetary shortfalls. In Clinton’s last years of office, we had budget surpluses. And the tax rates on the wealthiest Americans were higher than they are today. Not to mention we had better employment rates.

    Moreover, jobs are driven by demand just as much as they are driven by supply. The expression “I’ve never got a job from a poor person” is dangerously misleading because
    it doesn’t consider the fact that when lower and middle class people receive, for example, government entitlements, they spend the money to buy goods and services in local markets–and with increased sales, stores often need to hire employees to accommodate increased demand for goods/services.

    On top of this, income correlates with spending–the lower a person’s income, the higher percentage of their money that person will spend relative to their income. The highest income earners spend the least amount of money relative to their income; the lowest spend the most. Wealthy people still buy Ferraris and yachts and that sort of thing–so it may seem like they are spending a great deal of money. The key is–relative to their income.

    If you give $1,000,000 tax cut to 1 rich person, for example, he may buy himself a gazebo in his mansion for $200,000. That’s 20% of his tax savings back into the economy. But if you instead spent the money giving $1000 checks to to 1000 poor or middle class people (totaling the same $1,000,000 figure) each person, on average, may spend 90% of it. It doesn’t matter what they spend it on–Badly needed household appliances, food, auto work, — even booze, cigarettes, ipods, prostitutes. (expected value $800,000- back into the economy). You get more spending, and hence more, stimulus to the economy that way.

    And this is one of the main reasons why this country is failing — huge volumes of capital are being hoarded, or held hostage, by the wealthiest Americans (in fact, there is a historical record for the high level of capital being held on the books by corporations and other business entities). Meanwhile, the middle and poor classes are scrapping for the crumbs under the table. These latter groups–many are now unemployed, living at home with their parents to cut down expenses, and burning through their wealth. When they run out of wealth, and can’t get any more credit, they will be compelled to stop spending. And once spending stops your blood supply stops and the economy collapses.

    1. And our economy is driven 71% by consumer spending. Some day other countries will have so many dollars from Trade deficits that they will use the dollars to wipe their asses. How does printing money for people to spend mean we are a strong economy? Being a productive nation that has trade surplus made this country great not the other way around. Marginal utility my ass, consumption alone is not productive or Europe excluding Germany would be prospering.

  160. Look at the tax rates when our country was doing its best in the 1950s and 1960s. The tax rates of those top 1% was around 90%. The tax rate of the middle and lower brackets were lower. It is not true that the lower class pay no taxes. They also pay sales tax on almost everything they buy. This is at a much larger percentage than the rich because they are not forced to spend every cent they make to survive. Things have to change or there will be a revolution in this country.

    1. Cnile Senior

      Mike – I lived thru the 50’s and 60’s when EVERYONE in town went to the American Legion hall once a month to pick up “government surplus” cheese, flour, powdered milk, etc. Believe me, the country was not doing well. The economy did poorly until JFK lowered the top marginal rate to 70% and the Vietnam War cranked up. There was no middle class to speak of until the late 70’s, expanding dramatically in the 80’s.

    2. There is no Federal sales tax. That is state and local only and does not fund the Federal government is any way. What we are talking about here is the Federal income tax which is how the Federal government is funded by the citizens directly.

    3. Just look at the size of the Federal government in the 1950s. Would you like to go back to that level of services? I know I would.

      Second, you have to look at tax rates versus tax revenues. Revenues do not go up when rates go up. People put money into tax shelters instead of using it productively. Lowering rates means more people will invest, thus growing the economy. (All else being equal, of course. You can’t have expensive regulations that increase the cost of doing business, and expect the market not to behave accordingly.)

  161. Jean-Claude

    Yet another threat from the Baby Boomers. Current Federal tax policies will devistate the country in just 15 years.

    The federal government gets 38% of it’s revenue from just 1% of taxpayers. From the 2010 census, 86% of these top 1% are boomers in their 50′s and 60′s. The majority are expected to fully retire within the next 10 to 15 years. What happens when up to 35% of the federal tax revenue disapears?

    You mean that just because they retire, they 15% they pay on their investments will stop? They will retire, but their investments still be working hard, and they will be paying even less overall then they do now

    It leaves barely enough to support the military and pay interest on the national debt.

    So, maybe, just maybe, we should take a page from the rest of the world and not fund a military to a ‘per citizen’ average that leads the world. Maybe, we should stop sending money and troops to protect America’s interests, when those interests are for the top 1% of america. Maybe, funding Pakistan so they can hide Osama wasn’t the best move.

    When I can’t pay my bills, I loose all the things I have worked hard for. When wall street can’t pay it’s bills, my kids loose their future. Maybe, if you, as a banker, make a risky investment, your should LOOSE. That is why risky loans pay higher interest rates.

    If I grow my company too big to fail, using poor investment or business models, then I SHOULD FAIL, and be allowed to fail.

    Social programs such as Social Security, Medicare, etc, are unfunded, and the countries ability to borrow will be greatly reduced. Then what? Anyone, anyone?? Then what?

    The irony is, Social Security was funded, and makes more then it needs. Congress just can’t stop stealing it away. Same goes with the post office.

    The post office years ago realized people hate the fact stamps were changing every year. So, they raised the stamps enough to cover three years. They ran a surplus in year one, broke even in year two, and planned on using finds from year 1 to cover year 3. The problem is, congress got involved and stole that surplus to fund the war on Terror. So, year three, we had another cost increase

  162. Jean-Claude

    This isn’t realistic for two reasons. A person like myself can never work that many hours per week for a few reasons.
    I have a child – this is something you don’t take into consideration here. I am one of many people in this situation (and please don’t assume that I am some young thing with a bunch of baby daddies because I’m not). I’m 50 years old and I have a 13-year-old daughter.

    so, I should pay more taxes because you have a child? Sorry, what does that have to do with it? You get a deduction for your child, so your already paying less because of her.

    Another thing is that both my daughter and I suffer from a genetic disorder that dictates the number of hours I’m able to work. I have to be careful because it affects my vascular system.

    Oh, yea, I suffer from one as well. In my case it’s called Pitty.. as in I want to be pittied for not being able to work as long. I need to call the Dallas Cowboys and complain that although I don’t have the talent, I want to earn Tony Romo’s paycheck.

    I’m sorry to hear of your disability, but still don’t understand what this has to do with tax rates. I’ve seen total paraplegics do wonderful things. Look at Steven Halking (sp?)

  163. Real Economist

    A simple Herfandahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for the top 20% of wealth holders in the US reveals a staggering 7,225 on a scale of 10,000. In comparison, the Federal Trade Commission considered a HHI for the top 50 firms in any industry greater than 2,500 as “Highly Concentrated.” When one considers the “progressive” tax rate on income, one finds that at the highest income levels, it actually becomes REgressive. Couple these facts with the FICA AGI cap of $110,000, low capital gains taxes vis-a-vis wage earners and the omission of payroll taxes. It is also important to remember that only 19% of tax returns for incomes over $10,000,000 were attributed to wages and salaries.

    1. Cnile Senior

      The IRS still contends that the top 1% still pays 38% of ALL income tax and the top 5% still pays 59% of ALL income tax. And the bottom 50% pays pittance.

      Are you saying this is not true?

    2. If there were no cap on FICA benefits salary wise, then there should be no cap on payments. But the fact is that there is a cap on benefits.

      I would rather pay higher income tax than give above and beyond what I will not get back in a benefit that I will not be eligible for.

  164. Cnile Senior

    Yet another threat from the Baby Boomers. Current Federal tax policies will devistate the country in just 15 years.

    The federal government gets 38% of it’s revenue from just 1% of taxpayers. From the 2010 census, 86% of these top 1% are boomers in their 50’s and 60’s. The majority are expected to fully retire within the next 10 to 15 years. What happens when up to 35% of the federal tax revenue disapears? It leaves barely enough to support the military and pay interest on the national debt. Social programs such as Social Security, Medicare, etc, are unfunded, and the countries ability to borrow will be greatly reduced. Then what? Anyone, anyone?? Then what?

  165. I see many, many folks confusing the terms income and wealth and only using the most convenient statistic for their purposes. If we are talking about income tax (and the top 1% makes over $379k), for the most part it refers to workers that earn “income”, or income generated from interest from savings/retirement plans and dividends, etc. These dividends and interest is a large percentage of our elderly support themselves, the interest on their lifetime savings. Wealth, on the other hand, is the accumulation of everything we’ve worked for our whole life. Not surprisingly, older folks have accumulated more than 20-somethings. What we have now has got to last us until we die

    If you look at those hated one percenters, you’ll find that most are in late middle age and at the peak of their career. Many are highly educated professionals. Many are saving aggressively for their own retirement, their children’s college and some of us sandwich generation folks are caring for our elderly parents too. Yeah, we make more than you do but you know what, we worked very hard for years and years and years to reach this goal. We also get to keep about half of every dollar we earn.

    Lots of us didn’t get everything we wanted but we worked hard for what we do have. And now, we want to enjoy the fruits of our labors. Instead, the disenfranchised from one of the richest nations on the earth have decided that we don’t deserve what we’ve worked a lifetime to earn. For some reason, these folks think they deserve our earnings more that we do. I’ll admit it, I just don’t get it.

    Yes, there are other taxes we face – payroll taxes, which are a percent of income, not flat (yes, except capped at ~$108,000 equal to the cap in corresponding benefits,)

    1. AMEN! Plus many of us that earn over $250,000 live in parts of the country with extremely high cost of living. $250,000 in NJ is a hell of a lot less then $250,000 in Alabama.

  166. Cnile Senior

    High tax rates on high incomes does not hurt the “rich” as much as it hurts those aspiring to become “rich”. Very few “new” wealthy were created when the top marginal rate was near 90% after WW2. It was just not possible to “accumulate” wealth when the government left you with only enough to live on. And we all know that wealth generates more wealth. High taxes on high incomes maintains the elite bunch of “currently wealthy” which means better tee times at the country club, and less competition for the better things in life. If I were rich, I would want high taxes so you could not become rich and move into my neighborhood.

    1. Interesting point, and something I can understand. There’s a difference between the Top 1% who start at $380,000.. vs the rich that is depicted.. the multi-millionaires and billionaires.

      The gap between the top 1% and top 0.1% is even greater!

      1. Cnile Senior

        The downside of “old” money is it’s void of innovation. Whereas “new” money is usually spawned from innovation, ie Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, (Carnagie, Frick, Westinghouse in their day). The heirs of the rich seldom do more than just protect their wealth.

        1. I did not work my ass off for 20 years sometimes working 24 or 36 hours straight creating two successful businesses for myself, I did it to give my children a better life. I’ll be damned if anyone other then my children get my money when i die. If they grow up to be idiots and squander their wealth and end up poor, then screw them. But I earned and saved the money for them. I saved instead of living lavishly and always living well below my means. i could have just as well lived like a rock star, but I choose to leave something for them to help them in the future get a head start. Who the hell are these people that think they deserve the fruits of my labor and frugality? Please come to my house and try to take what I have worked so hard for. I am a fighter and always have been, that is how i got ahead in the first place. Good luck organizing a bunch of losers more interested in who just won Dancing with the Stars then how they can get ahead in life. I came from a poor family and am self made. My children should be able to reap some of the rewards of my success for gods sake.

  167. It’s interesting that when asked to justify excluding the FEDERAL payroll tax from your poor bashing article you say “but the benefits stop at $100,000 too”. The very programs you decry as socialist are the ones you say must be fully paid for by the recipients and not have the cost spread over a wider income base? What’s socialist about that?

    It’s also a fact that most of the money people pay into entitlement funds flow directly to current recipients and build no individual interest credit for the recipients over the decades that the government has use of it. And, f you die you get nearly nothing. Imagine a two income couple making near the limit each year for their whole working lives and both dying at 67, vs a guy making twice the limit in cap gains from an originally untaxed inherited trust fund. He would have done no actual work to get his income, paid zero in payroll taxes and got no SS benefit but fully eligible for medicare at 65, and so would the similarly earning (but actually working) couple who would have paid in 15+% of their productivity to the federal government their whole lives, been entitled to like 40 or 50 grand a month total (if they had lived, which would still have been a net loss unless they lived to like 110.)

    1. Oh and the couple would have paid nearly twice the federal income taxes too since theirs was all “earned” income, which is unfavored under the current tax system which you probably say should be made by a government that doesn’t “pick winners and losers.” You are a panty waisted errand boy for the country club fat cats.

      1. So the fact that someone else worked extremely hard maybe 1 or 2 generations prior to the guy who inherited has nothing to do with the reason why people should not only work hard for themselves in their lifetime but for future generations to come? People seem to have a sense or idea of entitlement based on a participation of the economy. I’m here working 9-5 so I deserve the same as the CEO that works 60+ hours a week and has spent his whole life preparing to be successful. Professional Sports don’t win games just by “participating”, they win games by actually providing for the team what team needs from them for a Victory….. the problem right now? sense of entitlement. We can continue down that road and eventually no matter what people do it’s worthless…. A major corporations’ CEO is worth and makes just as much as the kid working a Fast Food counter? i don’t think so…. Anyone can learn to take an order, everybody is not capable of running major corporations.

        1. Why do you think that huge salaries, windfalls and inheritances are the result of “extremely hard” work?

          I’ve been privileged enough to witness this is not always the case.
          More often than not, it’s connections and opportunity, as well as persistence.

        2. This is a silly aurgument – of course everyone can not be a CEO and most people can learn to flip a burger – ( I would challenge your assertion that everyone can do that – I have seen people who couldn’t learn that task.)

          The point should be that everyone should pay an equal percentage of their income to support the governemtnts in the US; State, local and Federal. When you compare the total taxes paid by the five quintels of income earners, only the bottom pays significantly less than the other 4 groups. And the top 20% only pay a couple more percentage points than do the middle 60%.

          Sure the rich pay a higher amount of the Income Taxes, but they do not pay a significant portion of the payroll taxes, unless you contort yourself into the amounts that business owners pay as matches.

          And the rich pay a substantially lower percentage of their income in local and state taxes, which is why their total ends up similar to other groups overall.

          You want a true flat tax rate – then subtract a flat amount from total income of all types for each dependent and yourself – then subtract your state and local taxes paid, and pay a flat rate on all the money that is left.

          The top 1-5% will not like such a system.

        3. Hey Steve, so silly of me to have such an argument. I do not agree with having a flat tax. I think our system needs restructure but I don’t think a flat tax is the way to go. If the folks that you have encountered are truly unable to learn a simple task then they provide very little contribution to the advancement of humanity let alone the economy. I don’t feel bad for them. You and I say, “of course not everyone can be a CEO”, but there are plenty of people out there who believe that they are entitled to the same financial treatment that the rich get. That is the root of my argument and if by using such an extreme analogy I struck the wrong cord in your guitar, I appreciate these facts that you bring forward. I still disagree.

      2. Dr. Herbert J. Smith

        You are forgetting (or ignoring) the biggest kicker of all: i.e., the “taxable event”. If my best friend (my dog Harley) is sick, I will take the money I have left over after taxes and give it to my veterinarian. My vet will pay taxes on that income. When his car breaks down, he will take it to his mechanic for repairs. He will pay the mechanic with the money he has left over from the money I paid him after he paid his taxes. The mechanic pays his taxes and decides to hire a landscaper to “dress up” his front door entry way. The mechanic takes what money he has left (after paying his taxes) and pays the landscaper. Now the landscaper must pay taxes on the income he has received from the mechanic. Do you get the idea that being a taxing authority (a government) is a great “business? Every time money changes hands, the government gets a piece of the action. Even if income taxes were only 10% from everyone that exchanges money from one hand to the other, it would take less than a dozen money transfers for the government to take >90% of the total money used in these money exchange transactions. You do the math. If you tax interest income, why save? Between interest income and the inflation loss of purchasing power, why save? What about long term capital gains taxes? You own a building (for 5, or 10 or 15 years) and you really do want to sell it, but with taxes and the loss of purchasing power of the dollar (again, due to the hidden tax called “inflation”) you will receive more dollars, but you will not be able to buy what you could have bought when you made the original purchase. So what do you do? Easy; you don’t sell. Trade has stopped. The economy becomes stagnant. No transaction transfers of money, means no opportunities for the “transfer tax” authorities to grab their share of the take. They call this “stagflation”.
        Now you know how to bring the countries economy to a grinding halt. The is the tax proposal that President B.O. wants to implement as his plan to print huge amounts of worthless paper money to get us out of debt and bring us prosperity has failed. Another “neat” idea of President B.O. is to implement a health care program that we cannot afford.
        What happened to the old advice of “if you cannot afford it, don’t buy it”? Do I drive a Mercedes, no. Would I like to, yes. Why not buy one any way? I cannot afford it, and I do not have a printing press.
        Thank you,
        Dr. Herbert J. Smith
        BURGESS, VA
        804 453 5519

  168. gary a southern

    This article is as CLEAR AS MUD ! Is the Top-1% included in the Top-5%? Is the Top-5% included in the Top-10% ? Etc. etc. all the way down the line to the Top-50%. And there are no numbers given for how many people are in each category, nor what each category collectly paid in $. Also, it is not clear what taxes you are actually talking about, if it is Form 1040 Individual Taxes ? Or does it include that portion of Corporate taxes that each category has in stock ownership ? Also, since 35% of all USA revenue comes from PAYROLL taxes and the Top-1%, Top-5%, etc. pay a MINISCULE amount in that category, doesn’t this look like the ‘poor’ are overtaxed even tho you claim they are ‘free-loaders’ ??
    Furthermore: Where is YOUR OFFICIAL source of IRS info. coming from, so your figures can be substantiated ????????????????????????????

    1. Gary its a cumulative result use your noggin. Please have the lawmakers change the laws concerning payroll taxes, $106,800 you only pay Medicare….but to take to task those people for a law they didnt create, please….

  169. Sick And Tired

    You know what you talk about a lot and I don’t think you realize that when pushed to far people stop playing by the rules and when the rules have more than half the population pissed at you for having somthing they want…just wait they will take it one day probably not in our life time but when it does it will be bad… Poor people who don’t pay whatever percent you are talking about(i am sorry that i didn’t ever get good with numbers) in taxes may one day get sick of not making enough money NO MATTER what they do(and this is real some people just find whatever they can to earn a living and hold on to it for dear life) They may feel entitled to the good things others have that they want and they will take it if they want it enough(or need it enough) I don’t believe this country will ever do anything to fix where we are heading because we allow everyone to have there own opinion and there is no control over the citizens… one day that 50% will be knocking on your door to take you and your families things for no reason other than they don’t have it and you do and THAT ain’t fair you want to talk about equality well give everyone the same hardships stop acting like somone in the upper 5% won’t be able to eat a week because they got an extra 40 dollars that month taken away by you assholes this isn’t just numbers people this is not just statistics this is peoples lives shame on you for your post

    Even though you have the right to say what ever you want. Support our troops(cause they are just trying to make a living the only way they could)

    1. If the poor STOLE all of the wealth in the country today, within a year they’d be poor again and the wealthy would be well on their way to success once again( Let’s call this the lottery syndrome). It’s a mindset, and it’s hard to understand it when you have the mentality of a criminal. Of course the disparity is rising between the rich and the poor, except for the housing bubble, where you could go into negative wealth, zero will always be zero!

        1. Calling it stealing is gross hyperbole. Taxes are set by an elected legislature. Most post war periods have seen top tax rates at double or triple current rates. This is absolutely normal. What is crazy is having multiple wars while at the same time lowering taxes.

          I completely accept the fact that wealthy people feel threatened that they may be asked to contribute more in taxes (although its still well below historical standards), so irrational knee jerk exaggerations are not a surprise. But I do think we need to peel back the layers of the onion and have a sober discussion on the topic. The more we discuss it, the more likely we are to at last reach a rational solution.

        2. Taxes ARE set by people who are elected. That means they need to make promises to the 50% , and keep promises to the 1% who pay for their advertisements. Without the ads, the 50% wouldn’t know they were making promises.

  170. LMAO @ Obama holding a puppy in the picture. The left is usually more subtle.

    We need a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percent.

      1. The tax code is how the government steers the economy. To argue for a flat tax is to argue against anything that the government currently subsidizes. Why? because lower taxes for certain things are effectively a subsidy towards them. We currently spend quite a bit on oil, and hate our $4 a gallon, but without the subsidies, how much would our gasoline be at? Nevermind nuclear power, rivers not catching on fire, penicillin, or anything else that the government has subsidized. Ergo, I feel that an argument for a flat tax to be shortsighted.

        On to your argument about state government vs federal government taxes. Government is government, and taxes are taxes, you can shield your grouping down to some miniscule direction, but you are merely making another shortsighted argument. Further, you said that the lower 47% do not pay taxes. Sadly, you forgot to cite that data. Your data, provided by the IRS, only shows the lower 50%. And, and they pay 2.53% effective federal income tax. Which brings me to another discrepency. We all pay taxes into the federal government, and not all of the federal taxes that we pay are considered income taxes. Give you an example: Tariffs that we wage on countries. When I buy my Iranian rug, or my chinese tires, I’m paying a tariff (because the cost is shifted to the consumer, right?).

        The problem isn’t that the rich are rich, or that the poor are poor. The problem is that the proportional aggregate change over the past 30 years has been to increase poverty, and decrease liberty.

        1. You think poverty rates have increased as a percentage? I’d like to see that data given the US has become tremendously wealthy over the past 100 years.

          I would argue that poverty rates have decreased as percentage in America, and just the absolute and percentage of the rich has increased.

          When everybody is making money, it’s OK for the rich to be rich. Funny as soon as there’s a downturn, it’s not OK.

          Feel free to start a new thread.

        2. Are you on the same planet as the rest of America? Recent reports from the 2010 Cencus show that the average wage in America has fallen to $28,000 per year. In your own table, the bottom 50% show an average AIG or only $15,354, while the top 1% show an average AIG of $1,204,247. And you think that poverty is going DOWN? REALLY!

          We had a ballanced budget for four years in the ’90s, at much higher tax rates than today. We also had an economy that created 23,000,000 net jobs, in the ’90s. We had a middle class that was the engine of the economy, growning and consuming.

          Then we had the great TAX REVOLUTION of the Republicans, “lowering the taxes on the JOB CREATORS” So where are the jobs? If you deduct the massive growth in government jobs under Bush, you have a net NEGATIVE job growth under their tax policy that was supposed to bring millions of jobs. WHERE ARE THE JOBS?

          The JOB CREATORS is a MYTHE. They do not exist, or there would be plenty of jobs for all.

          So let’s go back to the tax structure of the ’90s and see if we can ballance the budget again. Or do we kick the can on down the street again?

  171. Shawn Marie

    This isn’t realistic for two reasons. A person like myself can never work that many hours per week for a few reasons. I have a child – this is something you don’t take into consideration here. I am one of many people in this situation (and please don’t assume that I am some young thing with a bunch of baby daddies because I’m not). I’m 50 years old and I have a 13-year-old daughter.

    Another thing is that both my daughter and I suffer from a genetic disorder that dictates the number of hours I’m able to work. I have to be careful because it affects my vascular system. It is progressive so it will get worse, not better, unless a cure comes along. Having said that, I have paid my taxes and I have paid into Social Security.

    You suggest San Francisco as a place to go and earn a higher wage. If you lived there then you know what rent is there. When I left San Francisco in 1997 I was paying $700 for a tiny apartment with a kitchen a bedroom and a bathroom I had to share with other people. It turned out to be a fire hazard and was condemned. Before that I lived in a flat that was $1500 that was split two ways. Now, in 2011, rents are untouchable unless you’re making somewhere between $75,000 and $100,000 a year, unless you want to cohabitate with a bunch of people. I have spent months looking for a possible decent place to live there because I want to move back. There is no way we’ll be going to San Francisco, although, that’s where I want to be.

    I’m not whining about it. It is what it is. But there are some serious holes in that theory.

    1. Sorry, please clarify what my theory is? My statement is that everybody should pitch in to help out the economy. Everybody needs to have skin in the game and try and contribute more than they take.

    2. Maybe the problem is that you see “working more hours” as the only solution to increase your income. How about working a regular schedule and then studying how to start your own business on the side? You need to escape the trap of having your salary be your only income if you want to have the money to truly take care of yourself and your daughter.

      1. The time you spend studying would be part of the additional work being referenced. You are simply delaying the compensation for this work until you start making a profit on your business.

      1. Financial Samurai is that married jointly I assume? I saw 09 at 343K but couldn’t tell
        By the way the sales tax arguments I read are nonsense. Everyone has to pay them and generally whichever state is really pushing them is hurting the basic ability to draw new business to that state.

  172. Warren Buffet is not the only one in the upper category that is speaking out, and they are saying that the burden is not as great on them as it is on the lower 50%. I would tend to believe them rather than you.
    The reason to mention them is obvious. The difference in the percentage he is in is irrelevant. Try doing some research beyond Rush Limbaugh’s pie graph (with all due respect).

    1. I would give credibility to Mr. Buffet and all of the other super wealthy that say they should be paying more in taxes as soon as they start taking only the standard deduction and stop offsetting their investment gains with losses. Only then will I believe.

      1. And they won’t. The charitable organizations and other side firms these super successful groups form are a front. Yes Warren is great , and I think Gates want to give away their money responsibly however how could you ever say that if you earned money, paid tax on it, took the major risk of investing and made a profit it should be taxed heavily? Why would anyone invest? Our Federal Government has never seen a dime they didn’t know how to sp-end better than those that they represent which is false and insulting. Our taxes are bring wasted. Goodbye to SS for me and most under 40!

    2. warren buffet donated his entire fortune to charity.. does he REALLY care about his money ? he donated all his money to the Bill and ???? Gates foundation so his kids wouldn’t have the “burden” of money .. is this someone who we should really take example from?

      1. YOu are distorting what happened. He did not give ALL his money to the charieties. Agreed it was in the high 90% range.

        He rightly pointed out that he had given all his kids good educations and a nest egg to start out with, and expected them to work like he did to improve themselves.

        He has the right to do with his money as he chooses – If he were My Dad, I would say the same thing as I do to my own – just leave enough money to pay all your bills and plant you. If there is anything else left – so be it.

  173. This is quite typical of analysis that distorts the actual taxes being paid by rich vs poor Americans.

    You dwell on the income taxes being paid by the top 10%, but never mention the Payroll tax or other tax burdens that the rich pay a disproportionally lower percentage of.

    It does not matter if you only pay 3 or 4% in income taxes, if 50 or 60% of your income is taken by payroll tax and state and local taxes.

    An honest analysis would show total federal taxes paid as a percentage of Gross Income, not AGI. Then you would see, just as Warren Buffet pointed out, that the rich are really not paying as much of their income to support the Federal Government as they delude themselves into believing.

    The top 10% of income earners pay very little of the Payroll Tax, which was 35% of Federal Income last year, even with the 2% temporary tax break passed. And many or the top 1% get a sweet advantage in only paying a meager 15% on Capital Gains income, while wage earners are paying 35% with the exact same gross income. (And don’t even start the whining about being taxed again on money you already paid taxes on. Unless you are stupid or inept, you will deduct your basis for the investment from the selling price, and only pay on the profit made, not on the original investment money.)

    1. That’s because everybody who is working is paying the payroll tax, state taxes, and local taxes as well.

      Sure, taxes stop at about $100,000 for payroll taxes, but so do the benefits.

      Why are you using Warren Buffet as an example? He is the 0.0001%. Why not use the 1% at $380,000? Most of those people are working. The difference between the top 1% and the top 0.1% is HUGE. Don’t get confused.

      1. Yes Buffet is an extreme example, but so are most of those sighted in most of the postings you see on here. The point is that conservatives are always complaining about the bottom 50% of tax payers “NOT PAYING ANY TAX” – which is simply a LIE. Those in the top income brackets may indeed pay most of the INCOME TAX, but hardly pay most of the TOTAL taxes paid to the government. When you choose to ignore 35% of the income of the Federal Government to make your point – then your point is invalid.

        Independent analysis of total taxes paid to all government entities; Federal, State and Local, show that the top 1% of tax payers actually pay about 23% of all taxes. But so do all the other tax payers, except for the bottom 12% who only pay about 5% due to not owning property which could be taxed. Yet that same top 1% take in far more that 23% of the total income.

        1. Take it up withe IRS and those who keep track. We are discussing Federal Taxes here, you know, the taxes used to pay for our country’s welfare. We already know everybody who works pays local government taxes. There’s no ignoring anything.

          You’ve got to pitch in on a Federal level as well Steve to support our country. One can’t escape the Federal level. One can move states and consume less. See the difference? Fight for equality. This post doesn’t have the opposite of the Buffett example making a point i.e. a single mother with no legs and 10 children to feed on welfare. We’re talking the 80% of the population, the majority, not the fat tails.

        2. Payroll tax includes social security and Medicare. Benefits we get back. No comparison to federal tax. Even if we increase taxes on the “rich” it will not put a dent in our deficit, although it will make people like you feel better.

      2. To respond to your comment on 11/24 (I can’t respond to it directly), you’re again showing that you don’t grasp that “federal taxes” and “income taxes” do not mean the same thing. Federal taxes are all the taxes the federal government collects. One of those is the income tax, which the post gives figures for. Another is the payroll tax, which composes about a third of all federal revenue, and which is paid disproportionately by the poor. Besides that, there is corporate tax, the estate tax, and capital gains tax. By equating federal tax with only one of its components (income tax) you’re ignoring all of the others and being misleading in the process.

        1. “We are discussing federal income taxes.”

          This is the most misleading reponse I have ever seen!

          You ignore the thrust of tarjo’s post, let me give you an analogy so you can better understnad that you are being intellectually dishonest Samurai.

          I say: Jason Kapono is the best basketball player in the league, because when looking at the 3 poin averages he has the best! You reply: but you are only looking at one stat! That isn’t a fair picture you are painting. I say back: we are talking about 3 point averages here.

          Yes we are talking about Federal taxes, but you are missing the bigger picture, and you seem to be purposefully confusing in your article! When you are called out in the replys it looks like you are unwilling to actually face the mis-information you are spewing.

      3. People risk there money in the stock market, some win and some lose. If the person committing about the Warren Buffet rule thinks Capital gains tax at 15% shoudl be the same as income tax of 25-30% that is fine. I say go for Congress however on the flip side every time pay comes around sometimes you get a pay check and other times you get nothing. Capital gains Tax and Income Tax are two different animals one is earn by investing your money for the growth of the U.S. Businesses and is very risky. only allowed to deduct up to 2,000 a year losses. Fedeal Income Tax is earned by wages, there is literally no risk on making this money, as long as you show up for work and produce something for society, thus the tax rate is higher. Liberals just dont see this or ignore this fact.

        1. I think you miss the point. The payoff for the risk is the higher return. You are saying just because it’s risky, that you should be taxed at a lower rate. That’s just not logical. If that were the case, why would there be any tax on things like lottery and gambling winnings. Those are even riskier.

          The simple truth is, risk is not and should not be a factor in the tax discussion. You take higher risks, you stand to lose more, and you hope to have higher payoffs. THAT’s the reason for the risk factor. But you shouldn’t get a special tax subsidy or tax rate simply because there was a different risk.

        2. THANK YOU I didn’t see an answer that explained it. Risky investments deserve a return. Pretty basic.

    2. Actually the top 10% are mostly business owners who pay not only their own payroll taxes but also match the payroll taxes of all their employees.

      1. Jean-Claude

        The quote was:
        That’s because everybody who is working is paying the payroll tax, state
        taxes, and local taxes as well.

        What missed here is teh fact that if you work for your money, you can pay serveral times more in taxes on it, then if your earn your money as interest off your investments.

        If I work for a wall street bank, and make a million $ this year in cash, I pay taxes on it at the highest rates (about 40-50% when it’s all said and done between Federal income and employment taxes)

        If I get a $1 million stock option, and keep it a year, then I pay 15% on that, and don’t pay FICA or Medicaid.

        1. Bob McTigue

          You are wrong about the stock option taxation. Exercised options are treated as regular income and you pay FICA & Medicare + regular taxes. If you hold the stock for a year and sell it , then you pay 15% on the gain and no FICA or Medicare.

          Also, Medicare is the correct term, not Medicaid. At your level of knowledge, getting a $ 1 million dollar stock option would be a real stretch.

        2. You are very close to right – you would pay a top rate of 37%, which is the 35% income tax plus the ~2% Medicare tax. The tax you pay on the first 110,000 for social security may add another 1% at most.

          Meanwhile, as you point out, the guy on Wall Street who invests money to make money – pays only 15% on his/her income, and NO Social Security or Medicare taxes at all.

      2. All I know is the more I earn, the more percentage I pay for state and fed taxes as a w-2 earner. I work 3 jobs and my husband works 3 and we are in the top 5%. Our estimated taxes for federal and state are about 30-35% of our income.
        As a small business owner (and admit I am not the most saavy at knowing any loopholes etc), all I know is I pay more this year than my w-2 employees for FICA and match their medicare. It seems like unemployment taxes I pay are really high too….unemployment is something that most people don’t think about that their employers pay.
        Bottom line, maybe I am working too much. I didn’t realize I was in the top 5%.

        1. It’s kinda telling that you work 3 jobs just to get to the top 5%! Which means, you want to make money, and anybody who wants to make money and improve their life and get there!

        2. ARe you really in the top 5%, or are you like Joe the Plumber who did not have a clue as to where he fell.

          Your AGI, would have to be around 410,000 if you are in the top 5%. based on the total AIG in the table above and nubmer of people in that group.

          Since you should be deducting all the expenses you mentioned as business expenses, those would not count as part of your AIG, since they are deducted from your gross income to get your AIG.

          As for the Medicare taxes, you as an employer will pay a 1.45% match to the amounts you take out of your employees wages. And you do pay more in Social Securtiy taxes, because only your employee gets the 2% reduction this year, and you have to pay the full 6.5%.

          Obama, of all people, has perposed that your rate be lowered along with that of the employee, and currently, the Republican leadership is blocking such a move, which would look to help you. The Republican leadership insists that that tax reduction has to be paid for, even though the huge tax deduction for investers, which took their rate from 28% to 15% on Capital Gains, they say pays for itself. Not sure how that works, since my 99 cent calculator says that tax cut cost trillions.

          ONe thing that would help a business owner like yourself would be to take Corporate taxes to a flat 12%. You would pay over 20% less than you do now, and companies like GE would have to pay taxes, instead of gettnig a refund under the current set up.

    3. Mountain Man

      There are several flaws in your “logic”. First lets start with what you call payroll taxes.
      Payroll taxes are what you see removed from your paycheck. Which are Federal and State income taxes and FICA taxes.

      Whether from a paycheck or not, everyone pays Fed or State inc tax.
      FICA taxes are Medicare and Social Security taxes, combined. 7.65% total, 6.20% for SS and 1.45% for Medicare

      FICA taxes ARE NOT capped at $110,100 (for 2012). The SS portion is capped at $110,000, the Medicare portion is not.

      Next, what you see on your check for FICA taxes withheld are only half of FICA taxes. Your employer not only withholds your FICA taxes, BUT ALSO matches your FICA taxes and also pays the same amount. Your employer does that for you and each of your coworkers. Total FICA taxes are 15.30%, half of which are paid by the wage earner, the other half by the employer. If a small business owner, the owner pays 7.65% as an employee and another 7.65 as an employer.

      Now lets do some simple math. My friend owns a small moving company. His employee size fluctuates, but averages about 20. Lets say his employees make $35,000 a year. Thats 20 x $35k= $700K total income. $700k x 7.65% (FICA taxes)= $53,500 total FICA taxes withheld.

      Now lets say my friend makes $150k. He’ll pay as an employee, 6.20% SS tax on the first $110,100 of income-none on the remaining $39,900 is taxed by SS. Next he’ll pay 1.45% Medicare tax on ALL of the $150k.

      6,826.2 ss tax + 2,175 medicare tax =$9,001.2 as an employee + another $9,001.2=$18,002.4 total FICA taxes as employee and employer + $53,500 as employer contributions for employees = $71,502.4

      Now, the employer writes off all employer contributions from income taxes, but the fact remains, those FICA taxes are paid by the employer.

      If the employer is a huge corporation like GM, the shareholders are the owners, and FICA taxes were paid before profits were figured.
      Then corporate taxes were paid, by the corporation.
      Then dividends are paid from the remaining money (if any).
      Then dividend taxes are paid, by the shareholder, usually at the 15% rate.

      So simply put, the “rich” pay about half of all FICA taxes.

      Next, everyone seems to look how much taxes are taken from their paychecks, BUT FAIL to take into account their tax refund from the government. A refund from the government means TOO MUCH money was withheld AFTER all deductions are figured, and the government gives that money back.

      Then there are people who qualify for the EITC. They are the ones who make
      •$45,060 ($50,270 married filing jointly) with 3 or more qualifying children
      •$41,952 ($47,162 married filing jointly) with 2 qualifying children;
      •$36,920 ($42,130 married filing jointly) with 1 qualifying child; or
      •$13,980 ($19,190 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children.

      They will get a tax CREDIT not an exemption or deduction. They will receive or deduct from taxes owed,
      •$5,891 with three or more qualifying children;
      •$5,236 with two qualifying children;
      •$3,169 with one qualifying child; and
      •$475 with no qualifying children.

      Considering that according to the US census, the average household income is $51,914, that means almost 50% of all families qualify for the EITC.
      Here’s simple math.
      A husband and wife make $45k together.
      They have 2 kids.
      Standard deductions for both parents is $5,950 each or $11,900 combined.
      Personal exemptions are $3,800 each, for both adults and both children or $15,200.

      Exemptions and deductions are $27,100
      $45,000-$27,100= $17,900 taxable income.
      Tax rates for married filing jointly are
      $0-$17,400 income=10%
      $17,401-70,700 income=15%

      That means the couple will pay 10% on the first $17,400 and 15% on the remaining $500 for a total $1,815

      Now factor in the EITC of $5326. Instead of PAYING $1815 they will RECEIVE $3511.

      Now what must be done is to offset all other taxes paid throughout the year, from that $3511
      You can’t GET money from the government for not paying taxes AND THEN not subtract that from other taxes paid throughout the year. Such as State income tax. In Illinois, State inc tax is 5%. That family would pay $1065 in State inc tax.
      Subtract that from $3511 EITC= $2446
      Other taxes accrued through the year might be sales tax, cell phone tax, etc. These are taxes based off of what someone spends. In Illinois, state sales tax is 6.25%. there are county taxes that can be added or food is taxed at 1%. Lets us 5% as an average tax rate, Since gross income was 45K, we’ll tax the entire $45 at 5%, thats $2,250.

      Subtract $2250 (various sales taxes) from $2446 (remaining EITC)= +$196
      The family made $45k, there FICA taxes were $3442.5- $196 (remaining EITC)= $3,246.5

      Thats $3,246.5 TOTAL taxes paid on a $45k income. Thats about 7% of income.
      Granted, not everyone qualifies for the EITC or the top amounts.
      At the same time, Illinois, where I live has one of the higher inc tax rates. 7 states have no income tax and 2 only tax dividends and interest.

      1. It would appear you don’t like the idea of employers paying taxes. You do understand there could be a simple change to the tax law to get over your concern….have employees pay the full amount of the payroll tax. One of two things would then occur, the employer would said…tough luck employee…you lose 7% of your income….and I gain a (I’ll use a technical tax term here…sorry in advance) shitload of profit…or the employer would increase salaries to keep the employee whole.

        In a competitive market, the later would happen.

        Now what this whole argument is missing is a discussion on the tax treatment of captial gains and dividends…when the marginal tax rate on employment income for the 1% in 39% or so but the average rate is much much less…you must acknowledge the difference is due to dividend and capital gains tax rates…can you argue a 15% rate on capital gains is a fair share rate?

        Also missing from the article is an all in view of taxation…looking at just “income tax” is not the same as looking at the tax burden. There are taxes like payroll taxes and sales taxes which are paid by the poor which when factored into the equation generate a much much different picture…But if the purpose of the article is to help people feel like that they are doing the Christian thing by not forcing a tax rate increase on the poor….then, the writers can rot in hell.

        But this is such a distorted piece of self serving crap. It is a shame that the writers prey on the ignorance of the masses. That is not a Christian thing to do.

      2. But isn’t it true your friend didn’t make $150k? Didn’t he make $850k? $700k was paid out to his employees, but that’s a business expense that he deducted, as was the employer’s portion of the FICA taxes. Or, if you’re saying that $150k was AGI, then all those other expenses, including the employer contribution to FICA was already deducted out of his total income, which would have been something on the order of $150k + $700k +
        $18k + $53.5k = $921.5k. Which, lo and behold, make that $71.5k of FICA taxes paid 7.75% of his gross income. His employees earning $35k pay… 7.65% of their income in FICA taxes. In the case where “a few” of the other 1% get a large part of their income as investment income, on which they pay 0%, I think you are severely OVERestimating the amount that the 1% pay towards FICA taxes.

    4. You are incorrect on many fronts. I am one of the evil top 1% who help cover the 50% who pay nothing toward federal income taxes in this country. I also pay a lot of money in property taxes (which goes to pay for many things including schools my kids don’t attend). My state does not have state income tax but because myself and my family spend a lot of money I pay a lot to the state in taxes. The investments I own I purchased with money I have earned (which I have already paid nearly 35% tax on to the IRS). I don’t get deductions because I fall under the alternative minimum tax (as do most people in my tax bracket)…..which means I don’t get to write off healthcare, education, interest paid on my mortgage or any of the other expenses that most people do. There are no write offs or loop holes- that is a fallacy. If I make money on my investments and choose to withdraw it, I pay another 15%……THAT IS 50% total in taxes to the IRS!!!!! When almost 200million people in this country file tax returns and pay NOTHING, it is only because people like me pay as much as we do, and our government officials have learned most people are soft brained and will vote for the one who offers handouts. Most americans don’t want to do the work it takes to get ahead. It’s better to sit back and let the faceless, nameless top 1% support you……YOUR WELCOME. Now do us a favor and quit spreading misinformation and do something constructive and meaningful with your time; and instead of demonizing us, be thankful you don’t have to depend on the bottom 50-75%.

      1. You’re math and logic are wrong. In reference to “If I make money on my investments and choose to withdraw it, I pay another 15%……THAT IS 50% total in taxes to the IRS!!!!! ”
        NO!!! you do not pay taxes again on your original investment, you only pay 15% on the PROFIT from your investment. So you don’t pay 50% on anything.
        It is you who is spreading misinformation.

        1. johnnycakes

          Nigglet,

          She’s completely right. She’s getting double taxed for her money, first at 35% and then another 15% for doing something productive with it. Go back to the welfare office.

        2. BS. She’s misleading…or worse. Her investment $$ were taxed @35%.
          If she invests $50K and make no profit, she gets ALL that money back.
          She only pays 15% on the “income” she calls profit. AND she gets to
          write off any losses on that $50K.

      2. Melanie is right. Those of you that are not affected by AMT don’t get it. After all the deductions are calculated AMT wipes them out. The amount of taxes (and “fees” paid) as a percent of income produced is without question in excess of 50%

        Here’s something else to ponder. I own a successful small business and I bust my ass to this day to get my return. And Get my return I will. I earned it and employ 52 people… did i should say. You raise my costs and ill pass them along for as long as I can. When my return rate drops below a certain level and I start to lose gross profit and revenue…. I look to cut expenses.

        Guess where my largest expenses are? It’s not in the taxes folks….

        Be careful what you wish for when demonizing the successful. We didn’t become his way by accident

        Cars… That’s my business

        1. I love this argument.. “If you start punishing me by taking more of my money I’m going to take my ball and go home!” Good riddance, pack your shit and leave. I guarantee by the time you get home and flip your TV on there will be someone else in your place making that money that’s glad enough to have the opportunity that they don’t mind paying the taxes associated with it.

          So let me see if I get this. You feel the poor guy leaving his rented apartment and paying to ride the bus to his $8/hr job owes as much to the government for his use of public infrastructure as a guy that owns a company that depends on roads we all paid for to move his goods/services, and uses the police force we all pay for much more to keep an eye on his many properties? Are you insane, or just sociopathic?

          All I keep reading from half the people on sites like this are basically “So what if I make 10x the average household income and use the public infrastructure 10x more than the average person to do it, I should still pay the exact same rates as the average guy!!!”

          ..and they say poor people have entitlement issues..

          1. The person making 10x the average income is paying MORE than 10x the average pays in taxes. That’s the crux of the argument! Look at the chart. If ONLY there could be equality where a flat tax above a minimum level of income could be established.

            The 10x earner also does not use public transportation 10x more than the average earner either.

        2. “Be careful what you wish for when demonizing the successful. We didn’t become his way by accident

          Cars… That’s my business”

          You’re absolutely correct, you didn’t become successful with “cars” by accident, you became successful because of the world’s most extensive road system, guess who paid for that! Not you.

  174. If in principle you accept a 50% flat tax, then why not a 100% flat tax? Then everyone’s income is equal. And everyone is a volunteer. If housewives, househusbands, can do it, then so can you.

      1. Socialism. When you are not willing to do it yourself. When you are a coward and are not willing to try. When you just do not care about individual freedom. Solialism is just a way to say life is too difficult so I just do not care to put in the effort to be self sufficient. As I stated it is the way of Cowards.

        Individual

      2. something to think about. if you gave $1 mill to the 47%, who don’t pay taxes, how many of them would be worse off after a year???

        1. Probably most especially if they didn’t find/hire a good lawyer or two to protect
          their new found wealth! All of them if they put the money into the stock market!

    1. or http://www.lukegarrison.intuitwebsites.com until march 7th 2012

      I loved this information. I live close to Tyler Tx barely graduated high school in 1989 and always felt dumb in school or of lesser intelligence than average. and until today I thought you had to make millions per year to be in the top 10% I worked my first job for $3.35 hr in 1986 it took me 16 years to get to $14 an hr and to realize that I was not the dumb one and that me and everyone around me was no different than a slave trapped in poverty bringing home $419 a week 22,000 a year. so I quit that job and started my own carpentry business and within 2 months my pay checks where $ 1200 a week and growing.Plus with my wife’s 35,000 ( she went to a university ) we where making 98,000 evidently thats real close to the top 10% HERE IS THE PROBLEM WITH AMERICA all the time I see people who are capable of working getting disability ,also the state of Tx and the city of Tyler giving away free houses nicer than the house I live in to people for free and pay me to build and work on them THAT JUST PISSES ME OFF . and there proud to get it liked they earnd it or worked for it . I would be both embarrassed and ashamed but there not. It seems to me that we are teaching are children that if you cant be a great success just be a total frailer you will get provided for just fine and a lot better than a lot of those people out there working there ass off . PLEASE DON’T ARGUE THESE ARE THE FACTS. But I am now more motivated than ever to get into that top 5% and the 1% is in my grasp . THANKS FOR THE KNOWLEDGE. and I need 30,000 investment to make my millions which we will split 50/50 for whoever is interested.

      1. Gail Gregory

        Sir, imagine if you (a top earner) and the government were to get in on the 50/50 thing, where as a result over maybe five years, perhaps you two make a billion each somehow, then this is a good reason to let Bush tax cuts expire on the top few percentage of earners, agreeing they’ll return half of what you both make off this contract of splitting earnings from a $30,000, a billion dollars to you and a billion to them. The idea is, the government will have a hearty amount to invest, access to all sorts of investments, and you could stand to lose our $30,000 for five years. Now, since we got more than a million people who earn more than a million, and they all sign up to begin investing $30,000 and after five yers whatever they earn they split with the gov, and let’s say each make a billion, I think that works out to be a grand total of $1 trillion to the government. That’s a lot of “ifs” but the point is, who has the most money in the world, who can we get money from, and since I think it’s the government, this is one way for the top earners to make more money and the goverment to pay down on the debt and eventually chop up the deficit too. Some economists said if only Bush had used the surplus he was geting from the Clinton administraion to pay down the debt, we would have had zero deficit when he completed his two terms. I know, we had two wars and many other variables, and it’s probably impossible to raise a billion in five years off 30,000, but these are big points to make several small points for purposes of illustration. Maybe you should run the numbers, get a correct investment profit on, say, $30,000 over five years, and so forth, could be this contract thing might be something the whole Congress would like to do. Just a little imagination here. I know nothing of these matters, except WHY DO PEOPLE BUY GOLD when the graphs show it’s a whole lot cheaper if you just wait around for another Republican to ruin the economy? No answer needed. I’m just saying…

  175. roger sanchez

    The economic problems in the US stem from reduced demand and taxing the bottom 50% – besides resembling the blood from a turnip approach– will suppress demand even more.

  176. This post is false information. The poster should do more research before ranting false accusations. As a single 19 year old male I work 60+ hours a Week at 11.25$/hr I can submit proof tha I pay around 35-40% taxes on overtime pay and 21% taxes on regular pay. I can tell you I work longer and harder from the time I started working then this reporter ever has if he worked at my job he would in no way be able to complete the tasks that are required. To say we are lazy and feel entitled is a slap in the face. I say you are lazy. You are entitled. Your work is not worth what you are paid you are a leech to society filling peoples heads with lies about what hard work is you wouldn’t last a day in my shoes I make 20000 a year. I struggle to survive I’ve gone hungry for weeks with no money but I’ve never to a handout.

    1. Please pshow where I write you are lazy and entitled? Are you sure your guilt is not speaking for you?

      You do not pay 30-40% in effective federal taxes at your income. If you try and do your own taxes you’ll see at year end exactly what you pay and it’s not even close.

  177. The government needs to stop spending. We dont have an income problem. We have a spending problem!! Ed

  178. Forgetting the fact that the “average’ American is indeed well off when compared to some, income distribution in the United States is comparable to that of Iran and Russia, while upward mobility is less than that of most industrialized nations including England (which is essentially a class system). Meanwhile, the concentration of wealth in the US continues to skew badly in favor of the top 1% due to remarkably low Capital gains tax rates. Bottom line – this is not a sustainable paradigm. The economic problems in the US stem from reduced demand and taxing the bottom 50% – besides resembling the blood from a turnip approach– will suppress demand even more. Ben Stein, hardly a liberal, had it right — it is class warfare and guess which class is winning?

  179. How many times have we heard: “The rich don’t have enough. The poor have too much.” Pretty impressive propaganda. Forty years of that philosophy has left us in pretty sorry shape.

    A 15% flat tax is arbitrary. Why not 50% flat tax? Someone making a million dollars a year will still have 500,000. Hardly a sacrifice. Someone making 33,000 will have 16,500. Not much to live on for half the population of this country. If all the millionaires actually got just half a million it wouldn’t be so special would it, to paraphrase the author. If that high tax rate brought in more than government spends now, then rebuild the bridges, dams, rails, schools that are decaying, move the economy into sustainable mode. To do the jobs hire the millions the economy has thrown out of work resulting from the self-serving decisions of the billionaires and their government employees. And pay sufficient wages that no one is left out in the cold. Oh yeah, and stop the rich from buying the government.

    In the 1950’s, when the U.S. economy was growing rapidly, the rich paid up to 90% marginal tax rates. So for the rich to pay high taxes is hardly an unbearable burden on the economy or on entrepreneurship. In fact I’d argue that the economy grew in part because the rich were made to pay more.

  180. Eibner – I can’t recall a single stereotype you may have missed. If only life were as simple as the bumper-sticker mentality you seem to have embraced.

  181. I am a 1percenter. My dad went to night school on the GI Bill after Korea. I went to public school. I studied hard in High School. I worked and studied hard in a State College, and though my parents paid for my first year at Purdue, I paid for the rest of my undergraduate education myself. I worked at least one job thru college and sometimes more. I continued working all thru medical school, which I also paid for myself with savings and loans. I paid off my school loans, ahead of time, without complaining about it. As a physician, I work 7 days a week and when I’m at home, I am on call for my patients all hours of day and night. I work at my office, clinic and multiple hospitals. I pay my taxes, other than standard deductions, i have no tax shelters or use any loopholes. So, my question to all the 99 preventers is this, here I am, a 1 percenter, what do you want from me? I have worked hard all my life, don’t I deserve to benefit from this and enjoy the fruits of my labor? Isn’t that the American dream, that someone who comes from working class stock can succeed? My success was not at any of your expense, so why do I owe more than I already pay? I’ll leave with a quote paraphrased from Margaret Thatcher-” The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

    1. Thanks for sharing that quote. Never heard of it, and it rings true.

      I love how politicians like to decide how to spend OTHER PEOPLE’s money on their own desires and redistribution policies.

  182. It’s very interesting to read so many people complaining why they can’t get ahead. If you live in America, we have no excuse not to live a good life. We have so many opportunities, we’d have to be a lazy, knucklehead not to be able to make at least $33,000 a year!

    Janitors make $60,000 a year, and so do trash men. Why can’t you?

  183. Your description of what the top Americans make based on the Internal Revenue Service’s 2010 database as $380,354 doesn’t seem like what most people think of as the 1%. I know “take it up withe IRS”, but it would be interesting to hear your comments after reading the following article:

    How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich By Tim Dickinson.

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109

    The article describes a much different income strata than those making under half a million.

    1. Nobody has the exact figure. $380,000 sounds about right, and $1 million sounds wrong. Feel free to survey a thousand people around you and see if you can find 10 people who make over $380,000?

      $380,000+ is the beginning of the top federal income tax bracket of 35% as of 11/17/11. When people enter that bracket, they will really start feeling the pain of taxes. And when all they see in the news are people who pay much less to zero taxes say they are bad people, that’s when things get out of hand.

      Protesters are protesting the top 0.1%, not the Top 1%. However, don’t expect the protesters to care. Anything more than them is bad.

      1. One of the problems I have with reaction to the protests is presumption.
        Here in my neck of the woods there were plenty of everyday working people
        there that are fully aware of the taxes paid by people in that income range and
        certainly don’t think of them as bad people, or that making more than they do is
        bad. An observation of the status quo shouldn’t be construed as “a sense of
        entitlement”, or get a job and stop leaching off the system”, etc. There’s a real
        danger in blanket generalizations. But again, I would like to hear your
        observations of the article mentioned when you have time.

  184. bottom 50% member in Seattle

    “Financial Samuri” my ass! you are an idiot! Did you actully hve to live off of yuour incomre at mcDonalds in that long past job? If so, how would you do thatyt in todays economy? How would you pay for just basic rent, food, medical care, and transportation costs? Why don’t you go and work at McDonals in San Francisco for $10.00 an hou for at least 6 months, and survive on just that income! If they give you health insurance as part of the benefits, see how that works out when you have to pay the copay and deductables out tht income! See if you can actually manage to eat a healthy diet on that income? Are you actually saying that if someone is poor, they should not have a child? Should onlythe rich reproduce? Perhaps you and hitler could have worked out a deal about the Master Race, to include income requirements, and not just ethnic genetics! HOW DARE YOU THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE LOWEST INCOME GROUP IN THIS COUNTRY CHOOSE TO BE THAT WAY! You are social class bigot!!! I have worked from the time I was 14 years old! I have had to struggle all of my life just to get past the idiots like you who want to mke sure the rich get rticher, and fuck the poor! THE RICH LIVE OFF THE WORK, OFF THE SWEAT and struggles of the middle and low income individuals in this country! Who do you think build the roads, the houses, empty your garbage, process your sewage (not the feces you dump on this site, sorry to say)! The highest income people in this country who do not want to pay more in taxes (and there are huge number who are actually goin to congress to beg to hve their taxes increased to help their country); well those who don’t want to go back to the previous rates they paid and give up the pay off tax break increases they got from their buddy Bush; just what are they doing to contribute to the stability in this country? Perhaps by buying 9 houses, two yachts, and a helicopter; or paying $10,000 for a dress to wear to some social eventy, they are what; giving some jobs to the people who clean, cook, and drive for them? What about the fact that instead of a trickle down effect, they export as many jobs as they can to third world countries, so that they can increase their own coffers even more; while making sure that those countries increase their abuse of the environment through pollution, and who treat their workers worse than your dog is probably treated! Then, the theory is supposed to be that people in those other countries will have more income, then start to fight for their own rights as human beings… Well, that would all be great, exce that then the Big Company fat boys will just move on to the next third world country to abuse so they can continue to get things made cheaper and increase their own income! never mid the facty that this practice has also led to the importation of extremely poorly made and often unsafe merchandise; as long as the rich keep getting richer here, then all is well! If the tax breaks actually did result in an increase in jobs, don’t you think that would have happened by now, since the Bush tax give aways to the rich have been in effect about ten yeats now, but we are suffering the highest unemployment rates and the highest gaps in income equality since just before the greaty depression!
    I realize that my comments will not phase in the slightest, and that you will rem,ain oin your little self centered world with the delusion thatg everyone can just “get a better job” if they want to make more, etc… By the way, hope you don’t claim Christianity as your religion, because if so, you certainly forgot to read the most prominent guidelines that were supposedly given by the Messiah of thaty religion!!! FEED THE POOR, CARE FOR THE WIDOWED AND THE SICK, and oh yeah.. It is harder for a camel to get through the eye of a needle; than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of heaven! Perhaps that last statement from the “son of God” was referring tyo the fact that those who become so self centered and focused on their own successes as the most important things in their lives; even when those things come at the expense of others, are certainly missing the boat with the other instructions about being a just and caring person in this life!

  185. Average Guy

    @Reverened White Eagle
    Rev
    Hmmmm, I own my company, and I work outside with the rest of the crew, doing everything and more than they do. I get there before them and leave after. I do all the bidding, paperwork and business end. I do physical work, and administrative. And it has been rewarding.

    By the way, 12 hours a day isn’t much; 5AM to 5 PM, big deal, the kids are at school most of that time. I spend tons of time with my kids and even more with my wife.

  186. This is pretty ridiculous. First off if it is so easy to be rich, then giving some of that money back into social programs shouldn’t be that difficult. The truth is, and this may come as a total shock to some of you, some people actually are given more opportunities. Sure if you earn more money you deserve to be able to spend it. If you followed the outlined plan and had work ethic and worked 80 hours a week and your only concern in life is piling up money because it is the only way you know how to measure success than you deserve to be able to spend your money on things you don’t have time to use. But at the same time you should be smart enough to realize that not everyone has the same opportunities, work ethic, intelligence, father etc. as you and therefore paying a higher percentage shouldn’t be that awful. The point of everyone putting in their fare share shouldn’t be measured as an absolute but rather measured relatively. If you make more money you should pay a higher percent of taxes. A higher percent IS your fare share. I don’t think that everyone should be able to live off of your money or that it is your responsibility to take care of everyone, but making sure that basic needs are met is beneficial for everyone (https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html).

    1. If someone doesn’t have the same work ethic as me then why should I have to pay more in taxes to help him. I understand, accept and am perfectly willing to help those unable to help themselves, but not those who are unwilling to work hard and defer gratification on luxuries until they have covered the basics. As far as paying my fair share, I’m already in the top tax bracket, how much more do you want?

  187. ConcernedTeenager

    I’m 17 (I know I am young and don’t pay income taxes but whatever I will in a year) I am concerned about the inequality that exists in the world, specifically North America. I am aware of the occupy movement and its values, I also know some of my fathers more wealthy friends who told me how they found out how to pay less taxes. I have to say it’s quite disgusting how greedy some adults get. Hard work has always gotten people far, but to cheat the system that balances our financial lives is wrong. I heard on the news today how my municipality (Westside) Is seeing a large tax spending growth 8x larger than the population growth (Tax payers) and where was all this tax money being spent? definitely not my community. infact 82% of that tax revenue went towards the council and government officials Benefits and increased salaries. This is a sickening truth since we are forced to pay taxes to help make the lives of our leaders better. in all, not much in terms of equality has changed since the days of King Henry.

    1. Reverened White Eagle

      Very, very good. As a young and future tax payer, you need to get with others like your self and figure out what yo must do to save your selves. The old greedy generation that has control now must go down some how. Its your generation that must take control. I know a place where there are 14 million un parented children waiting for organization to run this world in the next twenty years. With you and you intelegent friends you can make this happen. With out violence. You just need a plan!
      Interested?

      1. ConcernedTeenager

        yeah, i’m going to law school and running in elections. that’s the only way to make change in a country with a democratic system.

  188. Why should someone struggling to get by, pay as much money as a man who owns a vineyard and flies to Hawaii and is sending their children to private schools. The fact right now is that the rich are paying less than their fair share.
    . . . .
    The problem is that rich people control the media, and the media controls what people believe.

  189. Your logic is flawed. You assume that taxation, etc. is the problem. The problem is not how much tax each entity pays. I am a capitalist but and I am entitled to a reasonable effort for my SUCCESSFUL efforts. But if my windfall profit far exceeds my reasoned projections, that value is the added value that synergism with all elements of a cooperative economy provides. The windfall value inherent in that synergism means the GDP belongs to all of America. There is NO Need for taxes for ANYONE or anything if you view the economic situation correctly and act accordingly. Want more detail, say please!

    Wolakota!
    (peace)

      1. Reverened White Eagle

        Excuse me I meant to say ILE is lakota for Light. Sorry for the poor translation Fred. Fingers and key boards are not one of my strengths.

  190. Reverened White Eagle

    Very interesting converstion. Thanks for the real tax info sam.
    Just a thought, but the top 5% are there by hiring the lower 50% that work their butts off so the top 5% are the top 5% because they don’t pay much more then minimum wage? Thus making it hard for those of us to even think of making into the top 50%.
    Making money hand over fist by running a business must be way harder then the guy who has to shovel dirt that makes that business.
    What if income was based on how hard a body has to work, the income charts would be the opposit. Sure some of the upper 50% put in 80 hours. I would like to see that in physical labor.

    1. First, your thinking is flawed from the get go. Minimum wage makes up for a VERY small percentage of jobs in the work force. Heck, go to McDonalds and more than likely starting pay is higher than minimum wage.

      Next. How much does it cost to open a McDonalds. You can’t buy into the franchise unless you can prove you have $1-$1.9 million in liquifiable start up assets.

      Land costs money. Building costs money. Equipment costs money. Stock costs money. Then you must have money for payroll upfront. When the store opens, it might not have enough business to sustain itself for a few weeks or a few months.

      All that money upfront before one hamburger is flipped.
      Now, if this is the store owners first store, he/she is probably going to be working at the store for 40-60 hours a week. (HIGHLY unlikely its 40)
      The average McDonalds has about a 10% profit margin. The average McDonalds does about $2.3 Million in sales.
      Lets say an owner has $1.5 mil invested and works 60 hours a week, does $2.3 million in sales a year and has a 10% profit margin, or $230,000. Does that seem outrageous?
      As owner/manager he’s working 60 hours a week. Whats a good pay for his labor? $75-$100k. Lets use $100k, that leaves $130k for return on a capital investment of $1.5 million. Just under 9%

      Now lets look at wages. It doesn’t matter what the actual wages are for the discussion. If we are assuming the store has an average gross income of $2.3 million and a profit ration of 10%, or $230,000, we know that $230,000 is potential wage pay increases.

      So, lets look at hours worked. Most McDonalds are now open 24 hours a day. At night staff is low 2-3 workers. During the day, 8-10-12. For discussion lets say the store averages 6 people on. Thats 6 people x 24 hours x 365 days a year.
      6 x 24= 144.
      144 x 365= 52,560 man hours.

      In other words, raising the income of each employee $1 per hour would cost $52,560 JUST in pay. It would cost another $4,020.84 in added FICA taxes. Depending on the state and how it figures unemployment taxes, that could be another $10,000 in unemployment insurance.

      Thats a total of $66,580.84 for a $1 an hour across the board raise.

      Whether we are talking minimum wage or $10 an hour at McDs or the like, $1 an hour isn’t going to substantially change ones lifestyle.
      On the otherhand, the added cost of $66,000 could make the difference of whether someone opens a McDonalds or not. Why would anyone invest $1.5 million into something where they’re not allowed to make a decent return on their investment?

      Now theres another way of looking at it and that would be to raise prices to pay higher wages. I’d have to know what the percentage of payroll is to other costs to get a good idea. But if we use a 1 to 3 ratio, 1/3 of overall costs are labor, then we could ROUGHLY say that a 50% raise for everybody would be about a 17%-20% price hike.
      A family of 4 that might be spending $20 at McDs now must spend $24.
      If a family went to McDs once a week, thats an extra $208.
      That $4 is going to hit a lot of people VERY hard.
      Sales will drop.

      Here’s the next problem. IF we increase pay at McDs to raise living standards, other places will also raise their pay. Thus, as McDs prices rose to pay its employees more, so would the prices of McDs suppliers. To the point where pay would eventually be back to the 1 to 3 ratio of payroll to material.
      Mcdonalds would still be at a 10% profit margin.
      And as costs for everything would rise, the pay raise for the employees would be negated by inflation.

      1. Reverened White Eagle

        Cool. Real quick on that calculator.
        Just a couple of things. Inflation is happening with out the pay raises. McDonanalds is a multi-million, dare I say billion dollar corperation. And why do they have to make a 10% profit margin. Doesn’t the corperation have more money than God at this point?
        Sure it has its stock holders that all make from what I can tell even with inflation, a decent gauranteed dividend without raising a finger. So why couldn’t they settle for 9% profit.
        I can see the reasoning for new business’. But well established gauranteed income corperations.
        There are a few things we can gauranty we will always have. Death, Taxes, Politics, Poor and Mc “D”s . I have a feeling China’s not gonna go away real soon. Oh and Wal-Mat so the poor can have TV’s, Refrigerators and Microwaves.
        Can’t believe your a real mountain man. I don’t want to offend and please don’t take this wrong but it sounds as if you could have a mansion in the hills. Please say it isn’t so. Say you got this wisdom from pondering a fire late at night in the mountians. By a cabin. Or a lake.

        1. Inflation is happening because of the government devaluing it. The printing presses are at full speed.

          Look up the Wiemar Republic.

          McDonalds itself might be a billion dollar company, but franchisees are seperate from the corporation. They buy franchise and licensing rights. It costs these INDIVIDUALS $1 to $1.9 million to start up.

          On the other hand, lets look at corporate. Every corporation is owned by stock holders. So basically the same principal applies whether I own the franchise myself or I own stock in the corporation. Either way, the owner/shareholder wants and deserves to make a legitimate profit from his investment.

          Now whether that profit is $100,000 or $100 million, makes no difference. The profit MARGIN stays the same.

          The individual owning the franchise might have to put up $1.5 million, but as a stockholder, I can buy a portion of the company for $1,500. I can get the same margin of return that the franchise holder would get, but for ALOT less invested.

          Thats where stock ownership is great for the little guy.

          Now you might have a problem with corporate McDonalds yielding the return because its a billion dollar company. The issue is there are THOUSANDS of “little people” who own shares of McDonalds. I can buy $1500 worth of McDonalds stock and get the same return as someone else, who buys $15 million in stock. My 10% margin is the same as his.
          That means YOU too can go and buy stock in McDonalds, and don’t need a million dollars to do it. Current stock price for McDs is $94.56. 100 shares would cost $9456.
          That might be too much for a beginner to bite off. There are many good companies selling in the $5-$10 range. A person could buy 100 shares for $500 to $1000, and IF the company makes a 10% profit, you as a stockholder share in that profit, proportional to your investment.

          The problem with your question on why companies can’t settle for 9% profit, is assumption.
          Meaning this. There is no guarantee of profit. Businesses shoot for a profit margin, but market conditions affect things. Sometimes profits are high, sometimes low.

          Never invest in the market money you can’t afford to lose.
          I was 26 when I bought my first stock shares, about 20+ years ago. Paid $1000. Sold them for just under $900. A loss of $100, no biggy. That company isn’t in business today, and if I would have stuck with it, I would have lost my entire investment.
          I did an investment partnership with some friends about 11-12 years ago. 8 of us put up $2500 each. Over time our investment fizzled and we all lost everything we put in.
          These were in the days when I was making $25K to $50k a year respectively.

          Today, my 401K is still about 20% under value from 3 years ago. Of course stock value and dividends are 2 seperate things.

          Lets go back to your 9% comment. My earlier post I list out man hours, and how a simple $1 an hour raise would affect profit margin vs improving employee lifestyle.
          I demonstrated that a simple $1 raise for every employee would drop profit from $230,000 at 10% return, to about $164,000. If $230k is 10% then $164k is 7.5%

          That $1 raise was a 2-1/2% hit.
          Now 2-1/2% percent overall doesn’t sound like much, but in the world of investing, thats a 25% loss.
          10% is the profit margin, but it is 100% of income or capital gains.

          Lastly, my name. I’m Mountn_Man because I LOVE mountains. Summer, winter, makes no difference to me. I’m VERY adept in a mountain environment. If you’re lost in the mountains with somebody, I’m the type of person you want to be lost with.
          UNFORTUNATELY, I currently live in the boring state of Illinois.
          Another reason why I’m Mountn_Man. I work in construction with some pretty big or hardened type guys, and commonly my coworkers make comments about my size. I might be only 6′ but wear a size 54 jacket. And when I wear a beard people say I look like a lumber jack. When something needs a little extra muscle, I’m the one people get. When weather gets cold and brutal, I’m the one slugging through. Snow, I love snow.
          I don’t live in a mansion. Far from it. I live in a 1500′ ranch home in a VERY middle class neighborhood. I do have a little cottage about 1/2 mile from a small lake. This cottage is about 50% bigger than my 2 car garage. Definetly nothing special. But its mine.
          Some years as far as work goes are good, some not so. ’09 an’10 were not so. Last year I worked just over 5 months.
          This year is a different story. I’ve been working 6 days a week, 10 hour days, with a 3 hour roundtrip commute, for most of the year. By far my best year.
          My view on taxes is whats good for one is good for another. I don’t expect anyone to do or pay anything I don’t do or pay.
          If I pay 15% or 25% or 28% in taxes, I feel others should to. I don’t feel that somebody else who makes more than me should have to pay a higher rate than me.
          Because of the hours I work,and the type of work I do, and the conditions and circumstances I have to work in, I have A REAL ISSUE with people who whine and complain about having to work hard or having to work long hours. Like I said, last year wasn’t a good year, this year is making up for it. But at a cost. I’m OK with that cost.
          I’m the son of factory workers. My mom is a farmers daughter. My dad was fatherless and became an ex-con. My parents divorced after my freshman year of HS, and my dad had nothing to do with raising me, supporting me or getting me through school.

          I’ve worked my way up from minimum wage to making over $150k this year. I’ve also spent 18 years as an adult volunteering in my church youth programs, so that other kids can have a role model like the ones I had.

          Because of this, I have absolutely NO TOLERANCE for any entitlement mentality. I expect others, if they want what I have or what others have, to do the things that I have done or what others have done. I expect people to pay their own way. That means those who expect others to pay a higher percentage in taxes, should themselves then be paying that same percentage in taxes. ANything else is an entitlement mentality.

          One thing I think I should clarify. Though I’m against all forms of entitlement, that does not mean I’m against charity or helping out. It seems that people of the liberal mindset, view us conservatives as greedy, heartless ogers. FAR FAR from the truth. Conservatives have shown time and again that they are the truely compassionate and charitable ones. I just believe my charity should come from my pocket, from my time and at my discretion. I believe that others should give as they feel they should, not at the demand of others.
          I find that those who demand more from others, are the ones doing nothing or little themselves.

          So after this, I think it makes it clear that I ain’t some cupcake living in a McMansion somewhere. Not that I wouldn’t mind having one. Mountn_Man is more than a name because I like the mountains. Its a way of life, an outlook.

  191. The problem I have with the spreadsheet is the use of AGI. The AGI represents all of the methods that have been created by government to hide income. I think the data would be more realistic with Gross Income (including all types of gains). I think the distributions would change dramatically.

    1. Does that include the family with 3 kids, who make $40K (gross) a year?

      Husband and wife both take a standard deduction of $5800 each. Thats $11,600.
      Next personal and depandent exemptions. Husband, wife and 3 kids. Thats 5 at $3700 ea, or $18,500.

      So, just using a 1040ez form, with standard deductions or exemptions that everyone can get, they wipe out $30,400 of gross income. They’ve eliminated 75% of their income from being taxed. Their taxable income would be $9,600. Their tax would be about $1000.
      Add to that that, they more than likely qualify for the EITC, which for 3 kids would be $5666. So, not only will they NOT PAY any tax, they’ll actually be given money from the government.

      Lets watch a high income earner try to shelter 75% of his income, without spending anything to do it.

      Back when the Bush tax cuts were put in, and everyone was getting their $400 checks from the government. My buddy and his wife didn’t get any. (And boy was his wife mad).
      The reason was, they didn’t pay any federal income tax. (Waaaaaah-no fair. I didn’t know I had to pay taxes in order to get a rebate from the governmnet)
      He’s got a small carpet cleaning business. He makes about $60-75k a year. So with his small business deductions, his mortgage deduction, his property tax deductions and personal exemptions for himself, his wife and their 6 kids, they paid no income tax.

  192. Beck,

    Yours is one posting I truely feel for. And I’m serious.

    You mention the struggle you’re having. And it sounds like one above and beyond your doings.
    I don’t hear you blaming anyone. And I don’t hear you EXPECTING others to make everything well and good. Working 50-75, THAT’S admirable, ESPECIALLY when others think its beneath them to do it.

    I hope and pray that God brings someone around in your life who can help with the burden. Maybe to put a healing hand on your husband and a strengthening hand on you.

    I ask God that he’ll make this Thanksgiving a holiday of Thanks-giving for you.

    1. Reverened White Eagle

      Amen. How can we the lower 50% help? We all in this together. May God bless us all.

  193. Alex deLarge

    Stop whining and crying for the rich. They live off the work of others. Labor(employees) create the wealth within a company which is then transferred to owners/shareholders. The top 1% in this country create ZERO wealth. They should be tax appropriately(IE 100%)

    Labour was the first price, the original purchase – money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.
    Adam Smith – Wealth of Nations

      1. Reverened White Eagle

        This looks like a good place to cut in Sam. I have read from both sides of the fence now because of what you started. Kudoes by the way.
        But, I still haven’t read any workable ideas that everyone can agree on. How can we exspect our government to figure it out.
        Even if big business left the white house, we the people can’t even figure out what to do but whine about it.
        I have whatched our politicians act like children. Now I am reading from even my intelegent rich and poor fellow siblings, “It’s your fault. You should Pay! I didn’t do it. You should pay!”
        What ever happened to the fellowship of America? The spirit on which we started this country. What happened to everyone is equal and has the right to all this country can offer.
        (Boy that ones gonna come back to me!)
        But, Seriously! Does anyone out there have any idea on how to fix this problem we have, so that everyone is happy?
        Or is this it? Big money kills the world economy.
        The rich will continue to exploit the poor.
        And the poor will be poor for ever? And pissed off!
        Hmmmm. Makes me proud to be an American!
        And by the way, I have gone from the top 50% to the low, lower 47% because of someone else’s vote. And I still work 70 hrs a week.

  194. I already work between 50 & 75 hours a week most of the time, but because I am on salary, it makes NO difference to my earnings. $28,000 a year, I have a degree and10 years experience, and my boss thinks he’s being generous. I keep looking but I am not finding any other openings in my area around here. And with the hours I am working, it is difficult to find time to look elsewhere or retrain. My husband got hurt at work, the Dr comp sent him to diagnosed it as aggravation of an existing condition, and rated his disability percentage at 0% – so now he’s out of work, in pain, we were already living tight because we were trying to put away for emergencies, savings is gone because of his medical bills that comp & insurance won’t cover, we had to drop medical coverage recently, and I still have absolutely no idea how we will cover the bills next month.

    And I would still prefer a reasonable flat income tax. I just sales taxes were lower. 10% means things get expensive fast. And my state recently changed the tax law to extend it to additional items – second hand items, services – that mean frugal people pay more sales tax than they used to.

  195. Marvin Clonkey

    Capitalism requires there to be winners and losers. How hard you work may affect your position, but regardless, the system will ensure that some of us will be poor, some of us will be rich and the rest will fall somewhere in between. It’s a fallacy to think otherwise.

    Which is why capitalism is merely an ideal. There’ll always be some degree of socialism in our economy. And yet people always want to argue economics from the left side of their brain.

    1. Capitalism does not require there to be winners and losers.
      Capitalism to be truely successful requires a win win situation.

      The problem is there are SOME who want to take advantage of others.
      And then there are some who feel that others owe them simply because they have more.

      Somebody with less isn’t neccessarily a loser. If someone is taking advantage of them, thats wrong. If they refuse to do what it takes to provide for their families needs, then yes they are losers.

      But someone content with a smaller amount isn’t a loser.
      But someone who is content to work a smaller amount and still expect others to pay them more, IS.

    2. Yes, but in a capitalistic society, the money is suppose to flow to those who do the work. Does this happen in corporate America. Usually, but not always. All the pro capitalists will spout how guys like bill gates and Steve jobs are worth their pay (and maybe more). But when a corporation is cutting jobs, cutting salaries, sticking it to the stock holders and still paying the CEO and board members big bucks, people get mad across the spectrum. So, estimate your lifetime earnings, or the lifetime earnings of your physician or lawyer then compare to a corporate CEO bonus for one year. Did they really do more work in one year than you will in your entire life? Was their idea so valuable and did they really do that much good for society? So one can argue that a goodly number of these characters are really not worth their salt!

  196. “Tack on another side job that pays $1,200 a month and I’m in the Top 50%. If you are only working 40 hours a week or less and are complaining why you can’t get ahead, you need to seriously re-evaluate your work ethic and expectations.”

    Lets look at that again.

    Are you serious? Frist, jobs arent exactly easy to come by now days. Even jobs at McD’s are in high demand. Second, you are what’s wrong with America. I mean really, 40 hours a week isn’t good enough? Maybe I just read that wrong but unless I’m in a dire situation and the planet is being invaded by Aliens who want our natural resources I don’t see why we have to keep raising the “work ethic” bar to unreasonable numbers. Yea, I can say that going the extra mile when needed will get you a long way, but to make is sound like you should HAVE to do that every week to get ahead is simply insane.

    What ever happened to having time to spend on the things that matter like raising your kids or developing your relationship with your soul mate. Or how about having acutal productivity instead of the mindless stockpiling of Zombie hours that seems to be a happening trend.

    In truth I despise people like you. You act like you achieve more because you spend more time working while your child gets bullied at school, who by the way cant cope because they have no real parent around to help them through it. Then you get promotions and start forcing your Zombie ways on your employees expecting them spend less time with their families. You promote these unhealthy ethics at work and applaud when someone who can’t keep up with the mindless pace gets brought out. In turn, you are a bullie.

    On behalf of America I request that you piss off.

    1. If only you spent time living overseas in places like India or China, you’d realize the world has changed. Definitely try learning a second language fluently, and you’ll get a better understanding of other cultures and what’s going on in the world.

    2. Its not everybody elses job to carry your butt.

      IF–IF you CAN’T get buy on 40 hours, by all means, YES work 50-60 or 80.
      There are some of US who do.
      Stay out of my pocket, if you ain’t man enough to take care of your family.
      McDonalds ain’t a job to support a family on. Thats where you go to get a start or make a little extra.

      Just the fact that you mention McDonalds says all I need to know about your work ethic.
      A real man ain’t going to EXPECT a McDonalds job to support him and his family.

      A real man will go out and work 1 or 2 jobs AND get and education, IF THATS WHAT IT TAKES to provide for his family.

      If you’re not willing to do that…STARVE.
      There are more people deserving of my help.

      No jobs that will pay you what you think your worth? Start your own business. Somebody had to start theirs, that you think should be supplying you a job.

      If they could take the risk, what makes you any more SPECIAL.
      Or is wife jus a widdle bit to hard for you?
      Lifes hard. Its even harder if your stupid (and or lazy)

  197. I just don’t get how the 1% became the bad guy here? Isn’t it a bit hypocritical when you rage towards corporate greed is fueled by individual greed? Complaining that you don’t have enough money, to those who have more than you is a bit like being a teenager. What did your parents tell you then? GET A JOB!!!!

    1. Funny isn’t it. Somebody is greedy for trying to get a worthwhile return on the risk they take investing.

      But somebody who hasn’tBOTHERED to develop skills or get an education that will get them hired, or WILLING to PUT IN the hours to provide for their family isn’t greedy.

      One has worked for their money is greedy.
      The other hasn’t worked for it and is expectant that the other owes them.

      Welcome to bizarro world.

  198. acid reflux

    ome ones math is wrong. You say you worked at McDonald’s for $3.50/hour now wages are 3 times that? or $10.50/hr. last time I checked the fed mim wage is $7.35/hr. at $3.50/hr you had to work 40 hrs. to earn $550/month. Now you suggest a second job? That’s 80/hr weeks. 16 hr days 5 days a week. no thank you. Do you work that? There is no defense. The top 1% needs to pay their fair share.

    1. If your life is all about making as much money as possible, then yes you take your butt to work for 80 hours a week. If thats all you are qualified to make, and you so desperately desire to be in the elite income earners then I don’t think you have a choice. Otherwise, get a stronger education or stay home and enjoy your life.

    2. I work 60 hours a week. 6 days a week, 10 hrs a day. + 2-1/2 to 3 hr commute per day.
      You do what you have to do to survive.

      Minimum wage is just that. Minimum.
      Thats for somebody with no skills, just getting into the work force. Jobs like that aren’t supposed to be careers. Those are for HS kids or retirees.
      Its not everybody elses responsibility to carry you, unless you’re infirmed or handicapped.
      Sorry, lifes hard. For everyone.
      What right do you have to burden others when you’re not willing to do WHATEVER it takes to take care of yourself.

      You can complain about me paying my “fair share” in taxes when you work the type of job I work and put the hours I do in, and drive the mileage I do.
      Time to man up buckaroo.
      This nations in a tough row, and your sucking on the teet of society just draws away from someone who REALLY needs it, and CAN’T provide for themselves.

      Here’s a little news flash for you, about fair shares.
      The top 1% make 20% of the income and pay 38% of the income tax.
      The bottom 50% make 12.75% of the incom but pay 2.7% of the income tax.

      That means the top 1% pay 190% of the tax burden vs income percentage.
      The bottom 50% pay 21% of their tax to income ratio

      Fair would be 20% income paying 20% tax
      Fair would be 12.75% of the income and paying 12.75% of the tax.

  199. Some Soandso

    If the world economy is based on the value of a barrel of oil, (demand) then you need to use more oil this year than you used last year. (supply) That way, more and more products and energy are consumed and profit is generated. {a projected rate of growth can be leveraged} Speculation on growth by the means of debt/borrowing.

    It is as if the world can no longer keep up with the amount of increase in oil use, or the ability to use more this year than last year on witch the concept of levering is based.

    So borrowing time to pay more and more money for less and less oil will be only greater and greater debt. Until such time the world economy is biased on something other than the value of a barrel of oil.

    An old saying is “nether borrower nor lender be”. It could be wise to take this idea to heart.

    It could be that public debt should be limited to 1.0% of yearly income, not 99.0% of projected growth in income over 1000 years.

  200. Some Soandso

    If I am asked by someone on the street “do you have some spare change” ? (implying that I should give some to them.)
    If I give this person a dime, then this person is a “success”.
    If I say “because I gave away a dime, I will put ten dollars in a folder to be opened at the end of the month” then I will be a “success”.
    If the person that I gave the dime to says, “well you got ten bucks”, (implying that I am “rich” and that I should give more). I will give a penny, and because I did, I will say, “I will put one hundred dollars in the folder”.
    If this person says “you have one hundred and ten bucks and all I have is eleven cents” (implying that I should give more). I will give a smashed soda can worth about one tenth of a penny and say “I have never seen a five hundred dollar bill in circulation” so I will put five hundred dollars in the folder.
    If this person says “you have six hundred and ten dollars, all I have is eleven cents and a smashed soda can”!
    I will say “your right, we’re a success”.

    Some people can’t even manage eleven cents and a smashed soda can, while others can manage six hundred and ten dollars or more.

    1. Soandso:
      Are you trying to make the point that not everyone is capable of successfully managing money, property … in some cases even the fundamentals of contemporary life? If not, I have to say I missed it entirely.
      Regardless, we live in a society with an economy based on cash.
      Just because one person doesn’t have the necessary skills to thrive in a monetary-based economy doesn’t mean that such a person should be doomed to live a sub-standard life.
      I’d be OK with a system where the poorest of the poor don’t live any worse than the best treated pets in our country. The problem is that some people just plain don’t treat “other” people with any respect at all — not even a basic respect as human beings. But the same people can lavish luxury on their pets because they are THEIR pets – part of their life, family … whatever!

      1. Some Soandso

        jefndenver:
        Yes, you missed it entirely.
        It is not as deep as you seem to make it.
        When attaching meaning to value, to give a dime is the same as giving ten
        pennies. Putting ten dollars into the future, is based on the principle of 100%
        profit, that will be realized at the end of the month. The difference in prospective
        is that, some people can envision the future, (time is money)while others are only
        focused on what can be had at the present time. When he says “you got six
        hundred and ten dollars” he fails to take into account that the end of the month
        is not until the day after tomorrow. (tine is money)

  201. Having the tax-free 50% pay their fair share 15% would add $60 billion towards deficit reduction (your math). As challenged as the economy is now, is removing that $60 billion from the economy and giving it to the government the right thing? You sound like a conservative, but you would propose raising taxes and restricting the impact conservatives claim low taxes have on fueling the economy…and give that money to the government…You don’t believe a liberal taxation is fair and propose changing it to reduce the deficit, yet at the same time you propose the liberal response of raising taxes…

    It sounds an awful lot like your true aim is to add a tax burden to the lower 50%, while at the same time removing 15% of the money they add to the economy–thus driving a struggling economy even lower–and reduce the effective income of the 50% even more…..It appears the only aim of your proposal is to further widen the gap between rich and poor. Sounds like you’re just an elitist revelling in bucking the concepts that made this nation great.

    The only reasonable

  202. NoHandOutJustaHand

    I’m not a regular reader of this author, so I’m not sure if there is a tone of facetiousness inherent in this article, but the idea that getting the bottom 50% to pay $43/mo in taxes will solve any problems is ridiculous. If the author is serious, he has obviously never lived as one of the nation’s poorest. I have. I know what the loss of that “measly $43/mo” means.

    Thankfully, I also made it up OUT of that bottom 50% and am now in the top 25%. Without government assistance, my family never would have made it. I have no problem paying a larger percentage of taxes than someone who makes half what I do and you greedy bastards that don’t care about your less fortunate American brothers and sisters ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

    There are those that take advantage of the system, sure, but the majority just want a fair shake. If given the chance, they will work hard and pull themselves out of the gutter. But you folks would rather step on their hands than grab hold and help pull them up. Our society is destined to fail if this “Every man for himself” ideology continues. It’s NOT what this country was founded on.

    1. Actually, if you read American history, you will find that America thrived because it was every man for himself. It was the one place in the world where people actually had that chance.

      Being out for yourself DOESN’T mean people don’t help others.
      Whats being resented today is the expectation.

      There’s a lot of finger pointing going on in this country. Its not simply by the haves and have nots. Its also by the do and do nots.

      Never before have the welfare rolls been so high. And its not simply because we have the highest population that we’ve ever had. We have a higher percentage of people on welfare.

      We have people demanding things. And there ain’t no way to pay for them. And yet still people want/demand them.

      This nation is $14.98 TRILLION in debt.
      This years deficit alone is $1.6 TRILLION.
      Spending has increased $1.1 TRILLION a year since Jan. of ’08

      There isn’t enough wealth or income to tax.
      in 2007 income tax revenues were $1.1 TRILLION
      in 2008 income tax revenues were $1.0 TRILLION

      We demand that government save us from all evils.
      We demand that the rich foot the bill or they’re greedy or cold hearted.

      Here’s the wake up call.
      THERE’S NOT ENOUGH MONEY.

      This years deficit is $1.6 TRILLION
      If we already have income tax revenues of $1 TRILLION, doubling EVERYBODY’S taxes would only bring in another $1 TRILLION, still leaving us $.6 TRILLION a year short.

      And we haven’t even talked about the added costs of Obamacare.
      Or the $2.6 TRILLION Social Security trust that is empty.

      Here’s another set of numbers 403 and $1.3 TRILLION
      403 are the number of billionaires in the US.
      $1.3 TRILLION is their combined net worth.

      Thats worth NOT income.
      Income is what you have come in year after year. Worth is the accumulation of income, year after year.

      The point being. The wealthy don’t have the money to bail us out.
      The entire wealth of all the US billionaires doesn’t even match this years deficit.

      Taxing the poor more isn’t going to do squat.
      But at the same time there isn’t enough money for current let alone proposed spending.

  203. LOL….I always laugh when i read these things. If you want to do better it is easy in America. Stop whinning and get off your butt. I work 75 hours a week and my wife workes 40. We have three kids and are in the 25%..almost 10% area. I am proud of the work we have done to get here. SO if you want to do better..just do it..and eventually it will pay off….otherwise..stop being part of the problem.

    1. freestuff – I’m glad you’re proud of the fact that you and your wife work so hard. Let me ask, how long would your savings last if you became unable to work for six months or a year?
      My point was not whining (which is how it is spelled by the way) since I was not discussing my own situation. I am in the 5 percent for current income but I have not always been there and I’m only just now starting to build for old age security and income security. But once I have my retirement secure and then I have ensured I can continue to earn an income while I do other things, then I don’t see the need to keep making more. In the mean time, I am proud to pay my taxes, contribute to charity, help family and friends, etc.
      But I have not always been in this position. I, too, have worked very hard (while helping people along the way). I have worked in small businesses and very large corporations. I have been self-employed a couple of times my first at 22 and I currently own a business on top of my full-time work and volunteer time. I’ve been very poor and I’ve been in better financial situations than I am currently. I’ve had tough breaks and I’ve had some very, very fortunate opportunities. I am a smart, hard-working person. But I’ve also had a fair share of luck and been in a position to take advantage of that luck.
      But probably my biggest strength is my ability to empathize with others. I don’t find it takes too much imagination to see how just a few bad breaks can devastate someone’s whole life. In part, because I’ve been there. But I’ve also pulled myself out with the help of others. It’s not hard for me to imagine that others can be in similar situations who don’t get the help.
      I think too many people like freestuff suffer from a lack of imagination. They figure that just because they’ve never been in a situation that it is a character flaw for someone who is. Those who have been in a tough spot in the past and got through it feel that because they were able to do it, others should, too. There’s no room in their thinking for differences, no matter how small or profound, that may account for different outcomes for others in similar circumstances. It’s a very narrow view.
      But my favorite is from those who say, “I’ve been in the same situation and no one helped me!” They are the ones who demonstrate, as human beings, just how small they really are.

      1. Well thanks for the responce. Well stated and I am glad you did so well. I feel the same way about helping others..as long as they help themselves. I don’t believe in giving to someone who just sucks off others. I have been there and as you dont know me you could not understand how poor I was, the drug abuse, physical abuse, and mental abuse in my family. I am not saying this to look for empathy but you seem to judge others by what you see yourself as. You sound like a nice generous person and I also constantly help those in need…but I expect them to help themselves too. One thing I can not stand is someone who does nothing and stands with their hand out. Sorry thats just me. Again thanks I enjoyed reading your responce

        1. I, too, hate typing. I especially hate auto correct on my phone! :-)

          I do judge others by what I see in myself but only as a starting point. We all judge others first by what we know. I think that was the larger point I was trying to make. Much of my experience comes from advocating for those less fortunate. I’ve heard their stories. I’ve also come to a conclusion that I know will probably sound strange to you. I don’t believe in “lazy” people.
          think about it, who would want to be lazy?
          Sure, there are some people who want the shortcut to a better life. But who would choose to be “lazy.”
          Instead, I think what many people see as lazy are people who live with depression, attention deficit and/or hyperactivity disorder, myriad mental illnesses, etc. The problem is that most people don’t recognize their issues or don’t know how to deal with them if they acknowledge them.
          You may even be one of the people who think such disorders are over-diagnosed and simply give people an excuse to be lazy, etc.
          I think there are some people who get a diagnosis and treat it as an excuse. Then there are other people who get a diagnosis and are then set on the path to deal with it because they can now learn to treat it and/or better cope with it.
          Probably my biggest issue is with the concept that people don’t change. It is the basis of so much unwillingness to help others because they consider them doomed to their genetics or their bad habits, etc. It makes it so very easy to ignore the plight of others by writing them off. Not only can they justify not paying for them, but also to justify in their own mind that it’s OK to do so.
          For the many people it boils down to simple cognitive dissonance – they have competing interests and beliefs on one hand where they are told that in order to be good Christians (or whatever their faith or morals may dictate) that they are to help the least among us. But their self interest puts people in a position of ignoring or modifying some of their moral beliefs in order to advance these self interests. This dissonance creates such a conflict that people not only begin to justify their positions of self-interest at the expense of others but they very often do so with such ferocity that they actually convince themselves that they hate the others and that they deserve their hate and derision, etc.
          I have spent a great deal of time with so many types of people. I started out my adult life a conservative. I’ve worked with very conservative people and I’ve worked with very liberal people. Mostly, I’ve worked with people who didn’t fit these limited viewpoints at all. They were just people who were trying to get by as best they could. Sometimes they succeed. Other times they fail. One thing that is universal to everyone is their ability to fool themselves into believe all sorts of things about themselves and others so they can sleep at night.
          I know I’m no exception I just try to catch myself when I do it.
          It just so happens that I AM the world’s greatest lover, humanitarian, gourmet cook and generally nice guy. And I’m sticking to that story.

      2. Oh and sorry if you thought this was meant for you..I was just leaving a open statement of my thoughts…I was in no way meaning it toward you.

        1. But I Just read your response above mine…lol I can see how you would have taken it that way….

        2. LOL…you obviously havent watched my video..I am the worlds greates lover but you probably cook better than me…maybe..:}

      3. Hey jefndenver,

        I agree in part to what you said about having issues and not seeing them. Recently (over the last 6 months to a year) I’ve come to a new understanding of what “I call” lazy.

        I get aggreveated to all ___ when I hear people whine and complain about their lives or jobs. Now I’m not talking major things like deaths in the family, or cancer or your kid just got caught with drugs. I’m talking people complaining about having to get up in the morning. Or they had to put a couple of extra hours in. Or they had to stand on their feet all day. Sometimes its that they want praise for doing just the basic things in life. They expect a cookie, just for doing their job.
        In the past, I’ve viewed all or at least most of this as lazy. I’ve come to realize that not everybody has the same strength or stamina or chutzpah in life. They haven’t excercised enough.

        Let me explain. A 300 pound out of shape guy walks onto a football field. No practice, no experience. He gets manhandled out there. Oh he’s got the size of a football player. but thats it.

        Take another 300 pound guy whose been practicing and playing football. He does the manhadling.

        Whats changed?

        The skill and development. One guy gets manhandled and complains that, “its too hard”. The other guy easily overcomes.
        Is football any harder for one than the other. Yes AND no. For the first guy, football is hard NOW, but not AS for the second. Why. Because the second one already did all the hard work earlier to make things easier now.

        Another example. Lifting weights. 2 guys, both lifting 250 lbs. It takes the same energy for both to lift 250lbs. The difference is one guys been lifting and training and the other guy hasn’t. One guy has to put seemingly more effort in. Is it any easier? Same weight. Its just that one guy is used to lifting 250 pounds, where the other hasn’t. One is trying to expend all his strength NOW to lift it. The other expended his energy earlier.

        So how does that fit my idea of work and how I saw lazy.
        I’ve got a buddy. He drives semis. He’d complain about how hard his job is. And what a good worker he was.
        I’d roll my eyes. I work construction.
        One day he had a tree cut down in his yard. I came over to help. In a short while he was tired. He was going for the smaller stuff, and I grabbed the chain saw and went after the bigger stuff. He’d grab branches and I’d grab logs. When he was worn out, I was just getting going.
        The point, he always complained about how tough his job was, but how good of a worker he was, but when it came time to do tough work, he folded. I work hard labor all the time. Its common place for me.
        My buddy’s wife would complain about how far he has to drive to work. About 25 miles one way. I do 120 miles round trip 6 days a week.
        Again, my point is, I’m used to the drive, he wasn’t. (Kinda funny, considering he’s a truck driver).

        The point I guess is we are all used to certain ideas or thoughts about work or life. We don’t understand our issues until AFTER we are confronted by them.

        A person who is used to working 40 hours a week is STRAINED going to 50. But somebody working 60 looks at it as a break. Is the 40 hour worker being lazy? Not really (Just a whiner).
        Like you said earlier, they just don’t understand their situation in life and how to deal with it.

        I have a cousin. (I’m still not sure SHE’S NOT lazy) Never had a real job, and she’s 49. She’s always babysat others kids. Recently life has hit her and her husband hard (mostly their own doing) They’re on government aid. She has to go in for job training, which she gets paid for. Other things in life come along, and she gets mad when they tell her she needs to treat her training like a job. Her training is about 20 hours a week. She complains about not having time to do things around the house. I want to b!t@# slap her. But I remember she’s at the learning curve of work ethic when it comes to a job. I’m already used to 60 hour weeks.

        I’m still not convinced its not laziness, but I’m trying to give her the benefit of a doubt.
        My issue is, I’m used to putting my head down and attacking a issue head on. For me its always been work a little harder or work a little more.
        I guess for some, its not quite so cut and dry. Its a learning process for me.
        I just hope I don’t choke someone before I learn it :)

  204. Here is an important thing that people are forgetting, those same people that pay damn near HALF of the income taxes in our country also employ damn near EVERYONE in the country. Also, anyone who strives to just work a minimum wage job for all eternity should maybe reacess their priorities in life. I work more than full time, well over 50 hours a week, in the military, deploy to third world countries for months on end and I still find time to take college classes in my free time so that when and if I decide to get out I wont have to work a minimum wage job. I know multiple women who are single mothers, sometimes of more than one child, but still find time to go to school to get degrees to better there lives and earn a better income for their family. Two of my favorite sayings in life are “Excuses are like a@@ holes, everyones got one and they all stink” and one is a quote from the movie Caddie Shack “the world needs ditch diggers too.” If someone wants to settle for a low income job than that is a CHOICE that they make but by doing so they choose to live a low income lifestyle; in other words reading about celebrities vacations instead of taking them. I absolutely refuse to think that it is fair to tax someone 38 percent of their income in ANY circumstance. That seems a lot like punishing someone for being succesful to me regaurdless of their “ability” to pay. Another thing I love too is when people bring up luxory taxes as an expense. Here’s an idea, if you can’t afford the taxes on booze and cigarrettes or the sales tax on a new car than maybe you shouldn’t BUY booze and cigarettes or that new car! The other thing that bothers the absolute hell out of me is that people like my father, who probably fall into that top five or ten percent but have earned it every step of the way have to pay so much of their income into taxes when others who have literally screwed up their lives and made bad decisions sit back and live off of other peoples success and good decisions. My dad did not go to college, started out in the electronics industry in the silicone valley running an injection molding machine making the connectors that go into computers, took night classes in business management in his free time and eventually got a job as a manager. Worked his ass off while raising two kids and supporting a stay at home mom and eventually was a regional sales manager. When my parents got divorced my dad QUIT a six figure a year job to go into business with his brother so he could be closer to home and now runs his own succesful business and all that is coming from a public school education and living in a household with 3 siblings on a public school teacher’s salary. My grandmother was a first generation immigrant from Guatemala and came to this country at 6 without being able to speak a single word of English but learned to speak so well you would have never known it was her second language. She also never got less than a “B” in a single class in school and literally worked every single day of her life from 16 till she died at 81 years old not because she had to but because she LIKED TO WORK for a living. Thats 65 years of employment without ever taking a dime from the system. I am so disgusted now by what I have started to call “The American Feeling of Entitlement” that is the new plague of our country. What ever happened to EARNING the American Dream instead of expecting it to be handed to you for being born here? Everyone in our country wants something for nothing now. I keep reading articles about unemployment and how we need to extend unemployment benefits and yet, when I do some research I find hundreds of manual labor or low skilled labor jobs all over the country and all that took was a simple craigslist search. Unfortuanetely people would rather take a free check from the government than come home with sore muscles from a manual labor job. My other favorite excuse is “I can’t afford school” but I am pretty sure every American has the right to enlist in the military and EARN the GI Bill but that would require sacrifice and no one in our country wants to sacrifice to get ahead anymore.

    1. Kyle makes excellent points. But he also seems to suffer from only being able to see the circumstances he or his family experienced. Not everyone is so fortunate.
      I have spent my entire adult life advocating for people with disabilities and those who’ve just had some bad breaks. One inexplicable conclusion is that it is incredibly difficult to break out of the cycle of poverty. No, it’s not always impossible. But the odds are stacked against you.
      For them, one illness can put them into bankruptcy because they can’t afford health insurance, what insurance is available on the non-group, commercial market is too expensive and covers too little. And if there’s a pre-existing condition, you’re SOL.
      Assume you go through several years without a serious illness or accident. You still get sick and for every day you take off work, you don’t get paid. So you come back to work while you’re still sick (and contagious) putting your low-income co-workers in the same situation. If you work in any industry with contact with people, you put a lot of other people at risk, too.
      At a minimum- or near-minimum wage job, how many days can you miss before bills start getting late. A simple late fee or bounce check charge can wipe away any savings you may have had.
      Faced with challenges like this, people often make decisions to take a risk.
      Perhaps they can skip their auto insurance for a month to get back on track. Even if they don’t get into an accident, they face incredibly hefty fines if they simply get caught driving without insurance and then they have the privilege of paying an extra fee for their insurance. Even if they don’t get caught, insurers charge a higher rate for those who can’t show they’ve had prior coverage.
      And if there was an accident, he’d better hope the fault is clear because when it’s not, the person without insurance is going to be viewed as the most likely suspect. He won’t have an insurance company paid lawyer to contest the accident so even if it isn’t his fault, he’s probably going to pay for it anyway.
      Let’s say they are able to get a temporary job, under the table, to make some extra cash. They get paid by check and think they are just going to cash it at the bank it is drawn on so they can pay the extra bills only to find that the bank the check is drawn on charges a fee to cash it’s own checks – something they know will not affect those with checking accounts.
      Let’s hope this person remembers to declare the income even though he didn’t get a 1099 on his taxes or he will get hit with a 25 percent under reporting penalty and interest.
      If you’re thinking such a low-income person is not likely to be audited, the most audited “profession” are tipped employees – particularly in the food service industry because they are able to catch hundreds at a time by a three-year audit of a single restaurant’s charge receipts (listed by employee). Once there is an audit, they have instant access to your bank records including that of your spouse or whomever you may share an account with.
      Most food service workers can’t afford professional tax preparation to catch these things and to represent them at audits so they just end up paying.
      How many of these things do you think it takes before someone who struggles every day to get by year-after-year, before they discouraged? Even depressed? Those with insurance can get some help, prescriptions, even therapy. Those without it may get to a clinic but then can’t follow through because they don’t have the money for the prescriptions. What’s even worse, they get some samples, they get started on the meds but can’t afford to keep it up so they stop which puts them at a greater risk of suicide (which disproportionately affects lower income groups and many children live in poverty for no other reason than a parent just plain died.
      I know this sort of story sounds far-fetched to many people who’ve never lived it. But to the great many more in this country who’ve lived it or know someone who has, this is a very real scenario – a nightmare that just doesn’t seem to have an end.
      I’ve heard the stories from many who have told me of their misfortune they were able to overcome. Some were stories similar to this. They are rare. Others tell me of their stories only to find that they were isolated and/or to discover that they had help getting out of it. Perhaps a family loan or an inheritance.
      Even the concept of inheritance is completely different for people in lower income groups than for others. For some, the only thing they have to look forward to inheriting is their family propensity for alcoholism or Alzheimer’s. Where others get free money just for being born into the situation.
      Even when higher-income people don’t inherit money or property, they are still in a much better situation to overcome negative circumstances than those who start out with nothing.
      Yes, there are people who will take advantage of any help and feel they are entitled to it. I also know rich people with a similar sense of entitlement. Who is more likely to push a restaurant manager for a free meal because the server spilled some water in their lap. To the rich person, it is just another meal out. For the lower-income individual, it may have been their anniversary or other special occasion. But it is nearly always the rich person who will complain until they get something. I’ve even seen them insist the server be “punished” for such things.
      Which brings me to my final point.
      There are some people out there that the acquisition of wealth is paramount to everything else. Such individuals usually get wealth. Some of them even do so at the expense of others – stealing credit when it wasn’t earned or even stealing other people’s ideas, etc. (Like the saying goes, if you’re going to steal, you’re better off stealing $1 million versus $100. You’ll probably do easier time if caught and it will probably be less time, too.)
      But the vast majority of people are not interested in being rich. Sure, they wouldn’t mind it if they made it big and some even play the lottery or resort to crime to get rich quick. They are not the majority. Most people just want to live a decent life, raise a family, retire and play with their grand kids. They’d like to do an occasional vacation and have a little money to give to their church and a favored charity. When they give to charity, many don’t give so their name gets put in a newsletter or on plaque. They just want to help.
      For many people, they give even though it hurts. In fact, I personally don’t consider it “giving” unless it really does “hurt” to give. if the person giving is not sacrificing, they are likely getting a tax deduction or their name posted for all to see. Sure their money helps but it is no coincidence that nonprofits have all these different ways for people to show off their giving.
      I’ve learned a very long time ago that when you break it down to the most basic components, human beings are motivated in the same manner as any other animal. They do things for one or both of two reasons: to gain a benefit and/or avoid a loss.
      For some people, the benefit to be gained and loss to be avoided is simply to do right by others and keep their own head above water in the process. I personally don’t think there is anything wrong with that. In fact, I think that’s all most people want.
      But instead, what we’ve seen is a series of polices that have made it impossible for those who don’t put wealth accumulation at the top of their list to keep their heads above water and we see policies where those who have wealth are able to keep and grow their wealth at an unprecedented rate.
      It has been the policies from the Great Depression through the 1970s that built the middle class in this country. it is those same policies that has pulled more people out of poverty and allowed for more people to achieve wealth (if that’s what they want) than ever before or since.
      It is not punishing a person who makes $10 million a year to pay a significantly higher tax rate than the person who spends 100 percent of his income just existing.
      Yes, government needs to do a better job of spending our money.
      Yes, we need to gear programs that empower people rather than breed dependence.
      Conversely, there is no reason that at this time in this great country there should be people who freeze to death in winter or die of heat exposure in the summer.
      No on should go hungry – especially children.
      No one should die from or become disabled by a preventable or treatable condition for inability to pay for care.
      To say otherwise says more about an individual than any insults or charges an opponent can throw at them.

      1. I agree with you absolutely on some points. I work in the healthcare field so I know that there are most definetely illnesses that CAN prevent people from working and those people and the parents of those kids – who in my book are saints – should definetely recieve some form of compensation. However, I have also worked side by side, not in the military obviously, with a girl who had pretty sever down syndrome but still worked to earn her own living as a courtesy clerk at a local grocery store. I also worked with another girl who suffered from a form of mental retardation who not only worked as courtesy clerk making at the most 11 dollars an hour in Santa Cruz, CA which is not cheap and with the help of social security (I believe the handicapped qualify) was able to support herself on her own despite growing up in an abuse home and family environment. Obviously, I am well aware that that is not an option for everyone with a disability and I do think that it is our responsibility to take care of the people in our country who are truly in need. However, I believe that these people are the EXCEPTION and not the rule and it is very easy to medically prove if someone is physically/mentally able to work or not. I also agree that SOMETHING needs to be done about the healthcare situation in our country but that doesn’t change the fact that EVERYONE needs to pay taxes if we ever want to have a truly fare tax system. If someone makes ten mill a year I absolutely think it is unreasonable to take away 3.8 million of that JUST in income taxes. It takes away incentive to expand and create jobs and it also takes away incentive to provide employees with bigger raises, health care and 401k benefits. I still feel that people who “barely make enough money to exist” are there generally due to poor decisions they have made in their life. It doesn’t matter what those decisions where someone else made them and they have to live with them. Not to sound like a heartless son of a @#$&@ but fact of the matter is if you stick a needle in your arm, put your lips around a bottle, drop out of school/dont go to school, don’t use contraceptives, etc., than you now must have to live with those choices and should not rely on society to pick you back up when you have literally knocked yourself out of life. If those choices lead to you freazing to death on the street than that is one less freeloader in our society. I make less than 40 grand a year and I do still give to charity and I do not take a tax write off for it. Do the rich get to write off charity donations? Yes, they do, but there contributions are also so great that I believe many of the charities they donate to would not even exist without their contribuitons. I also agree with you entirely that our way of “helping” people needs to change. We should take the funds used in welfare and put them towards an after highschool education program to provide people better job training in entry level jobs. We also need to reevaluate the way we use our prison system. One of the groups of people that I feel the most sorry for are people that perhaps commited a crime out of desperation for whatever reason and honestly want to make a turn-a-round in there lives but literally can’t because they can’t get a job somewhere due to lack of education and a criminal record. A huge percentage of our prison population upon release reverts automatically back to a life of crime because they have no options. The prison environment also has just become a way for people to become better criminals. The only group of people in our country I feel truly sorry for though are the true victims of bad decision making, children. Children who are born to people who don’t really want them or even people that do want them but can’t afford them are the only people that are really victims of our society. I am also not “content with keeping my head above water” I would like to retire well before 60 or would like to save enough capital to start a small business and own a house or or maybe even two. I can do right by others without having the government tax my income and FORCE me to give my money to people that I feel don’t deserve it. In fact, I would probably give more money to charities that help real victims if I had more money after taxes to spare. The reason why people live in America and why even now people immigrate to this country is not so they can just float above water but so they can secure financial independence and freedom.

  205. You need to learn how to do math. It would take $71/month for each of the 69 or so Billion bottom 50% earners to create $60B in tax revenue.

    Yes, absolutely. Let’s take all those with mental or physical handicaps, all those who are very old, or very sick, and have them move to San Francisco whose vibrant social media will make it easy for them to work 40 hours a year.

    That’s what I like about republicans. They can’t multiply or divide. They think vaccines cause mental retardation. They think anyone sick, old, or unlucky should be dumped in the middle of the ocean.

    1. Ummmm.. do your math again. You’re embarrassing yourself. How many people are in this world? How many people live in America?

      There is no hope for you, I’m sorry. But, at least there will be for someone else.

  206. Mark Webber

    I am amazed as to how the rich see the people that work for them in labour positions as a burden to them. The rich feel that those physical labour jobs are given to them and they should just shut up and accept what ever money is handed down to them and be dam grateful for it. The rich want those lazy people to either get an education or start a business and make a way for themselves like the rich do.

    The rich don’t understand that those people that work for them work hard everyday. 40 hrs a week and most likely no weekends off. They don’t have the energy to start their own business on top of everything. College is just too expensive. They go home in their run down car or take public transit and eat food that is either not fresh, (canned) and most likely no higher priced cuts of meat either. The home maybe older with rot in the walls or dusty duct ventilation because professionals are too expensive. Maybe the house is drafty or something else is wrong so that their general heath is never that great.

    With everything against the working class it is a wonder not more criminals are created. The rich want to limit healthcare or raise its cost. Eliminate minimum wage because they think this will create more jobs for small business and therefore create more taxable revenue for the government. They also want the jobs to be part time so that any overtime won’t raise the hours over the 40 hrs a week so it will all be straight pay. This is just a trick to create more jobs. This is a type of Reaganomics or called Fiscal Conservatism.
    This helps get businesses growing, the rich to get richer, grow the economy but what about all those people who earn less? The long term effect will be bigger burden on the healthcare system than ever. 20 or 30 years from now the only answer will be either mass extermination or more social programs than you can shake a stick at. The way the rich are talking now, which way do you think they will go?

    So you might be asking yourself, what can an average slob do to stop the inevitable decline of modern society? Well don’t vote Republican, that’s for sure. They are the ones in bed with the rich and do their bidding. The way they are stopping President Obama from successfully passing a jobs bill or changing the budget to gain revenue from the rich and increasing social assistance to the poor is a pretty good indicator of what will happen with a majority government of Republicans.

    People don’t want to pay taxes to support the heath and welfare of the poor. I can understand but listen; the majority of the poor are ethnic minorities in the United States. The repressed, the outcast from societies norm. They got there from days of Lincoln. Imagine if slavery was reintroduced to America. That is really how buying and selling of slaves became so repulsive to the Yankee sense of right and wrong. When a slave got sick they were not creating revenue so getting a new slave would be a better idea than nurse maiding the sick one till he/she died. It just made economic good sense.

    With Christmas coming there are more Eboneser Scrooges out there than ever.

  207. People in general are very confused by the definitions of fair and equal. They are not interchangeable terms. Equal means everyone gets the same treatment. Fair means everyone gets what they NEED. It is equal to have everyone pay the same percentage of taxes but not necessarily fair. Some people feel it is only fair to have everyone pay equal taxes and other feel it is fair to ensure that everyone has a certain minimum standard of living. I am someone who grew up in the bottom 50%. I received free lunch at school and significant grants from the government to help with college. I also had many student loans. I am now in the top 5% of wage earners and I can tell you that people in the bottom 50 % often work as hard if not harder than those in the top 5%. There are a few people who live on welfare their entire life and do have a sense of entitlement but that is NOT the feeling for the majority of the bottom 50%. Most of them work hard and do work multiple jobs when they can, but unlike most of those in the top 50%, they do not get paid if they are sick. They do not have sick days and never get more than 2 weeks of vacation. Those in the top 5% typically get more vacation days the longer they work at a company. I know my company does give me sick day but rather tell me that if I am sick, please do not come in and I still get paid. I only have to worry if I am out for more than 30 days and then I get short term disability 100%pay. When my parents got sick, we had no money. We could not afford medical treatment that was recommended (like having my tonsils removed). I am now able to afford to pay for treatment for myself for a rare disease. My sister has the same problem but is in the bottom 50% and can not afford treatment. For me it costs $225/month but the insurance she has working that bottom 50% job covers far less and it would cost her$1200/month for the same treatment. That is nearly her entire salary.

    I am in the top 5% and have no problem with paying my fair share, not my equal share.

  208. What I haven’t really seen addressed is a comparison of the relative benefit from the taxes paid by those who pay them. In particular, I’d like to see a description of all the veritably “hidden” benefits of government services, etc.
    For example, traditional welfare programs such as food assistance and Medicaid are pretty obvious (and that is why we tend to hear about it).
    But what about others that are not so easy to see?
    We all drive on roads but many of the poor don’t use because they don’t have vehicles. Yes, roads are paid for in part by taxes on fuel but they are funded in many other ways, too. Commercial vehicles have an disproportionately negative effect on wear and tear on roads but don’t pay the proportion of taxes to cover those costs. It is not the very poor who avail themselves of the civil legal system in this country and while fees offset these costs, they are still largely taxpayer supported.
    I think we should separate these types of societal benefits in our discussions and realize that we ALL benefit from societal contributions and that those designed for the poor are really only there to help ensure a minimally humane existence.
    Yes, some people abuse it just as some people abuse the tax system.
    But if we’re talking about people who are benefiting from social programs to scratch out that minimal existence, I am less inclined to want to scrutinize every dollar they spend (or misspend) and am more interested in those who have made their fortunes from the government trough through government contracts, etc.

    1. The benefits decline precipitously the more taxes you pay. Do you think someone making $500,000 a year and pays $200,000 in taxes gets 70X the benefit of someone making $30,000 a year and paying $3,000 in Federal taxes?

      Hell no. It’s called theft by the government.

      A road is a road and a public library is a public library.

  209. wow financial samuri is retarded

    This guys math is wrong. His logic is wrong. And his attitude is wrong. On top of that he attacked another responder for explaing a difficult situation involving raising a child. People like financial samuri are what is wrong with this country. He obviously has no idea what financial hardship is and he is completely devoid of moral value. I have worked very hard my entire life often having two or three jobs at once working 18 hour days and have never made more than 22000 a year. I have never had the opportunity to go to college and moving was not a realistic option either. I am now supporting a family of three off of a 9 dollar an hour job. I can’t even buy a canned soda with the bills that I have and we cannot afford to move. There are no job opportunities and we are not being wasteful with our money. Just rent and electricity alone takes all of my income. The only way financial samurai’s statistics are right is if you are already born into an american household that is in good financial order. Without debit in a good area and able to help out with college.

    1. Step one is to stop digging if you find yourself to be in a hole. Step two is to really look yourself in the mirror and evaluate what are the things you can improve about yourself (unless you think you are perfect), and figure out how to get better. I tell myself I am nobody every single day, so I don’t lose the hunger to fight.

      You can blame statistics, or you can blame yourself and change.

      Fight on brother. Never surrender. We live in America, where anything is possible.

  210. Also, it always AMAZES me when conservatives tell you to just shut up and start your own business, lol ,sure, with what money? That is taking a HUGE chance, most would need loans to do so AND not everyone is going to be “business wise”, it is just not going to happen. Also, the whole abortion issue is finished, ok? It is a legal procedure, just get the hell over it already. Before it was legal, women died. Making it illegal will only cause the deaths of more women as they will not stop getting the abortions. There are 7 billion people in this world already, do we really need anymore unwanted ones? Population is a huge problem. Can you imagine if all those unwanted kids were here? There are no jobs as it is, and with the conservatives anti jobs policies, it is only going to get worse. I will finish now, because fighting with a conservative is just a waste of time, only see in b/w One more thing, stop tooting your horns about your income. My husband and I made 175k last year, we got lucky, even I could admit to that. Lots of people who work hard did not get so lucky, can’t stand people who stand on a freaking pedestal judging others. Also, you never know when you may lose that $, I have seen it happen, don’t think you are above it.

    1. It costs me $12 a YEAR to register the domain of this site, and $300 a year for server the first year. I’m sure you can come up with $313 a year with your 175K salary.

      If you never try, you will never win, and yes you are right, you will never lose.

      The best is when people make $175,000 a year and sit on a high horse and go against capitalism.

      1. It is even funnier to watch these ultra rich actors talk against capitalism with their 40 million dollars

    2. I’ve said this before but I’ll say it again, I started in my industry and for the first 6 months earned ZERO. I lost my apartment and moved onto my mom’s couch. I could have gotten a paltry hourly job but I dug my heals in and got it done. Now I’m quite comfortable. Had nothing AND I MEAN NOTHING to do with luck. Luck is gold falling out of the sky which it does not. Sure, you can be in the right place at the right time but you have to DO SOMETHING with it which takes more effort than luck. You want to help people? Donate your time and money! Don’t have time? Guess you missed out on that “luck” ’cause that time is spent doing other things.

      Prior to my current career I was a $5/hr plus tiny commission TELEMARKETER. I took my SKILL that I worked very hard to develop and started my own brokerage. Took NO money to do and I charged $35 AN HOUR up front in 100 hour blocks. I personally serviced 50 hours a week so all on my own I earned 7k a month. 23 years old in 1995 making 7k/month. My overhead? A phone. There was no luck involved. It was a lot of hard work and more time than most people care to spend.

      And the abortion issue? There will ALWAYS be people that are okay with it and are not okay with it. If you don’t know how it all came about, you’ll see Margaret Sanger as a “hero” of some sort when in reality, the negro project was all about keeping the “less desirables” from breeding and it was put in front of them as your “choice” or “right”.

      My aunt was murdered while she was pregnant and the man that did it is serving 2 life sentences for 2 counts of murder 1. How is that possible? According to you, he only killed ONE person! That baby didn’t have any right to live, or any rights at all! So how is this man serving time for killing something that had less rights than a delta smelt? WHAT INJUSTICE!!!!

      When obama’s policies started coming down the pike it was going to GREATLY impact my business so in order to stay in business I had to make some minor adjustments. No one is paid hourly anymore, everyone is a 1099. I lost 4 people and 3 came back. Turns out that 60k a year for around 30 hours is pretty damned good. And if they want to make more, they can either work longer/harder/smarter. It’s up to them. It’s amazing what happens to someone when they take control of their own destiny, and no matter how hard you try or how much you want to believe it, hourly pay doesn’t give you that unless you are smart with the money you DO get to take home.

      Last year I conducted my own experiment. I put an ad out to hire and offered people 20% more than what they were getting on their unemployment checks. Not one person bothered to ask if they could be promoted, get a raise, get commission… nothing. I offered the job to 14 people and not one of them took it. I was willing to pay out of my pocket 20% more than they were getting from the govt without expecting any production for the first 90 days. No one took the job. No one.

      So please, don’t tell me that people are wanting jobs. What I’ve found in REAL life experience is that people want the jobs they want for what they THINK they’re worth. And surprise people! You (and your house that you paid too much for) are only worth what someone is willing to pay.

      And p.s. I moved to the east coast from a tiny beach town in orange county, CA where the average price of a home is 1.2 million dollars. I know about how expensive things can be. And no, I didn’t get some jumbo sub prime loan to keep up with the kardashians like most people in the country opted for.

  211. I started biting my nails just when I started reading the BS spewing from the person who wrote this article. Conservative policies have never worked, not during the times of herbert hoover and certainly not now. Also the post above “claiming” taxing the rich hurts the country, lol, NOT true the exact opposite. Read up on history. Also claiming lower income earners are lazy is also a crock of you know what. My husband and I are in the 5% as well, but live in an area that is expensive(long island) I have never had a problem with my tax dollars going to people that need it. My husband got really lucky to make good money. A lot of it has to do with luck. I am sick of those on the right calling low income workers lazy. I guess a person working 12 hours in mcdonalds is lazy too, right? These days people with college education are not landing good jobs these days. During the recession, most of us have sacraficed but people like me BIL who works for UBS bank has made out. Why are we not asking them to make the sacrafice as well? He is most certainly NOT paying what he should be and people like him have sacraficed NOTHING! Time to change that. Seems only the middle and lower classes sacrafice, rich NOTHING, greed, greed, greed. With the income they make, they need to pay out more

    1. True I just want to sit at home and get my check and play video games…Tax all the rich till they bleed

    2. You got “lucky” and make good money? So you do a job that SHOULD pay … say $10 an hour but got “lucky” and found someone to pay you more than you’re worth? I don’t know anyone that truely considers themselves “lucky” on their earnings unless they won the lottery and invested it.

      I’ve never heard someone on “the right” call anyone low income lazy. I’ve heard liberals SAY that they call them that but have never actually heard it come out of a mouth for myself. What I do know is that ingenuity is lost because it is taxed to death. Hillary Clinton was in Pakistan and said, “We (the USA) tax everything that moves”.

    3. Hope you didnt have a nervous breakdown with your Top 5% income living in Long Island.

      Nobody said people who make $10 at McDonalds are lazy. Where is that written in the article? I worked at McDonald’s for $3.25 an hour and was the best damn egg mcmuffin maker in the restaurant!

  212. @Phil
    Actually YES!!!! We were in the lower income % and HATED it. We hated not being able to pay bills, travel etc. So we worked 70+ hours a week…used our tax $$ to start a small inhome business, learned how to advertise and our business took off. Our taxes were only 3K and most “poor” people EASILY (with kids) get 6-10k back a YEAR in taxes. BUt what do they do with it all? WASTE on a TV’s and crap they don’t need. YOU and anyone can do it if you are motivated and keep at it. have you ever seen Persuit of happiness? He made it…we’re FINALLy making it. We are now in the top 15%. Was it easy? heck NO! Was it worth it? You bet!!!!

  213. Do you really have a problem with someone like “The Situation” who made 4mm last year paying 40% in taxes. I sure don’t.

  214. I know ‘good family’ and ‘dropped out of school’ don’t go well together however my parents were awesome i just was a bad boy for about 10 years.

  215. I am fortunate to come from a good family. I was raised well. I dropped out of high school, never went to college, but i was still smart, worked hard and now i run my own internet marketing business that puts me in the top 10-15% every year.

    Knowing all this i still think that we are a society. Sometimes the rich have to help the poor. Sometimes the ones with have to help the ones without.

    I have no problem paying my taxes, because as a business owner, i have tons of loop holes and and an good accountant that helps me pay the very least possible (about $3000 last year). Just like there are some poor that abuse a system that gives them the very minimum to survive. There are just as many, and most likely more well off people who abuse the same system to make more money and not have to pay their share.

    We lost close to 3mm jobs last year and shipped the same amount over seas. This is a world economy and world market. As a Americans we no longer make ANYTHING, we create nothing. The people with money don’t invest in making a better car, or a better VCR. They take their money and use splits, derivatives and other investment tools to make more money all that the sake of the lower class creating a large economic gap. That is how its done now, and we must tax them to get back in the economy that which they no longer contribute as they did decades before.

    1. Marc, you are correct. This is a WORLD economy and WORLD market!

      We are competing with people who make less and are HUNGRIER than us. It’s time we realized this and stop feeling so entitled!

      If you want to get ahead, work 80 hours a week and brainstorm some new ideas! If not, someone else will eat your lunch and dinner.

  216. The greeks are about to lose their country because they can no longer pay the intrest on the
    loans the economic hit men forced on them. If the economic hit men fail to force countries to take loans so big they could never repay them, such as Saddam Hussein, then we send in the Jackles to overthrow the leaders or kill them. If that fails then we go to war. The G20 is now forcing Greece to take more loans only to delay the inevitable bankruptcy of that country. Of course some or all of that loan will be forgiven in exchange for allowing US military bases to be placed in their country.

  217. I only have one final thing to say. My grandfather came here from Ireland when he was 8 and spoke zero english. (very strange accent) He used to say “find a need and fill it”. He started a welding company, then expanded to selling welding supplies, then to selling gas, then to manufacturing the gas and now there are 14 retail stores in central California.

    FIND A NEED AND FILL IT DAMMIT!

  218. For a man to be homeless all he needs is a box.
    For a man to become a billionaire he needs: schools, roads, trains, airports, hospitals, armies, laws, et.
    Obviously, America needs billionaires to grow and prosper. So what comes first: the chicken or the egg?
    Just do me one favor: stop feeling sorry for the billionaire.

  219. tax bracket should be what it was in the 50’s..the rich don’t pay nearly as much as they should. 90%…thats right 90%

    1. great idea! But taxing someone 90% is going to give them as much as YOU get which is no motivation to bust ass and earn that much. And it’s been PROVEN that the more you tax the rich the less revenue the country gets. The trick is to expand the tax base and have everyone working and paying their FAIR share. I pay quite a lot in taxes but I do not receive ANYTHING from my government. My roads, plowing, parks and rec, etc are all paid by my state taxes. The only thing the federal govt gives me is defense and I’m certainly not receiving more of that than the next guy.

      It boils down to someone being pissed off that someone else is making more money than you. You’re bitter. When I was younger I used to ASK the wealthy how they did it rather than being mad that I was in a position that wouldn’t pay me what they made. And now, I am quite comfortable because I listened to them. 85% of the millionaires in this country started with nothing.

      We should get RID of the corporate tax all together. Unfortunately you can’t go back to the 50s (don’t you democrats always accuse republicans of wanting to live in leave it to beaver’s house?). We’re in a global economy now thanks to NAFTA and GAT. If we tax people more and more, they are now free to walk away and take their money and jobs with them. I’d rather have no corporate taxes and create 50 million jobs than high taxes with negative job growth that we haven’t seen since Hoover. I’d gladly say NO corporate tax if a corporation would move it’s (let’s say in the case of G.E.) x-ray division BACK to the USA and dole out 10k jobs. If we had no corporate tax, no one else in the world would be able to compete with that and every business in the world would be breaking their necks to open up shop here.

      We even had job growth DURING the “great depression”!!!!!!!

      1. No one ever paid 90% taxes. That is one of the biggest exaggerations ever. We have a graduated tax system, so everyone pays the same amount (10%) for the first $8500 earned (17k if filed jointly). If you make more than $8500, then anything above 8500 is taxed in the next bracket, at 15% (up to $34,500 for individuals, 69k joint). So if you make 10k per year, then 8500 will be taxed at 10% and the remaining 1500 will be taxed at 15%. It is tiered like that all the way to 379k, and if you are lucky enough to make that (AGI–NOT gross), then you pay 35% on any money ABOVE 379k. Even though a person making that much would be in the 35% tax bracket, that person would NOT be paying 35% of his or her income in taxes.

        Then there are deductions, 401k contributions, FSAs, HSAs, etc….all ways of whittling down your AGI. Of course, these things typically benefit the wealthy the most, since those are people in the best position to take advantage of tax breaks (a person living paycheck to paycheck may struggle to put away 10% for retirement, whereas someone with a lot of disposable income doesn’t really miss the money that much). So, a person with an AGI of 379k is probably earning something closer to 450-500k, though I know it would vary vastly from individual to individual and family to family.

        When Reagan lowered taxes, the upper brackets were pushing 90%, and I would agree that that’s excessive. But no one was ever paying 90% of their income in taxes. It’s a disingenuous argument to suggest they were.

      2. I agree with getting rid of corporate taxes, they are just a business expense. Just tax the ultra rich on their personal income at a fair rate; not at the meager capital gains tax rate we have today (to benefit the ultra rich). Reagan recognized this and when he needed to raise taxes, he taxed the ultra rich too. Under Clinton, the capital gains tax was cut, and cut further under Bush II. You need to wonder if these two guys work for the same people.

        1. sure! why not! 80% of capital gains income is held by people making 100k or less! Great idea! Capital gains tax is NOT income tax. They are 2 different taxes and capital gains tax is actually double taxation anyway! Taxing capital gains makes it impossible to recoup the money you handed (or were forced to hand) to the government.

          No one is suggesting that the “ultra rich” shouldn’t pay taxes. What people have a problem with is that they are being told they should pay their “fair share” which falls far from actually being fair.

          And the “rich” that don’t want to pay MORE taxes have a very valid arguement. Why give (or be forced to give) more money to poor stewards? You can tax the “top 1%” 100% and it wouldn’t make a dent in our deficit, much less debt. But it would kill any hopes for anyone else to ever make a living OR become wealthy at some point. For the first time in history our debt has exceeded our GDP. Tax us ALL 100% and, aside from killing any economy that we have left, we’ll still be in debt and then have to means of paying what is left.

          and wonder if these 2 guys work for the same guy??? LMFAO YOU WONDER??? I can remember when people would look at me like I’ve got 3 heads when “new world order” came out of my mouth. It’s like they didn’t get the memo that Bush 1 sent out.. or somehow weren’t listening to that speech!

          Something else that needs to be pointed out is that people complain about corporations/rich having so much control over the government. Well, they pay the bill! They have MORE skin in the game. I find that the more I pay in taxes the more concerned I am about where the money goes. What is it about people that makes them think they can pay nothing, get checks from the govt and then have any valid claim to how it’s run?

        2. Perhaps capital gains are held to a large degree by people who are not utra-rich. However, I would venture that these holdings are in retirement accounts that will be tax at regular income tax rates when withdrawn, not at the lower capital gains tax. So, how can anyone think for a second that a low capital gains tax is nothing more than a tax break for the ultra rich and merely a bone for anyone else who might be fortunate enough to have some stock outside of their retirement account. What we have today is an inverted tax system where the ultra – rich pay less than the the 99th percentile at 380,000K. This is clearly unfair to those who work and pay taxes at higher rates (like the other top half of wage earners. I wish that someday, I too can earn so much money that my average tax rate drops to 18 percent.

  220. Not sure someone making less than 33k per year can just pack up and move to San Francisco bay area! Especially if they have children. Sounds like you are a bit out of touch. We make over 100k per year, and it would be a very difficult move for us financially!

    1. It takes less than 7 days by bus to move cross country vs 3 months for settlers who did it 300 yrs ago. The Internet also helps you never have to move either.

      Be resourceful. Yes, your 100k isn’t a lot, and we feel your pain, but you can make more if you want.

    2. Danielle, once upon a time people moved to where the work was. They didn’t consider or CARE if little Bobby was going to have to leave his little league team. Want to know why people become “rich”? Because they are WILLING to do things that will get them there. They will take a loss on a job to earn someone’s business. They will work 60 hours a week and sacrifice something else with that time. They will NOT buy that flat screen TV and get some gold or silver instead. If your priority is comfort, then you need to decide WHEN you want to be comfortable and at what cost. Do you want to work hard now while you CAN or do you want to stress out when you’re 80 praying that your SS govt check is going to come?

      I’ve moved several times. Left my friends and family. Sure, I’d rather be in California on my beach in the sun drinking coronas but right NOW I have to live in the land that time forgot so that when I go back there I do not need to worry.

      The problem is people aren’t willing to do what they need to do to get ahead. Sometimes it hurts! But it doesn’t hurt for that long.

      1. First of all, I’m more than satisfied with my 100k, thank you very much. We live in a large home in a nice neighborhood, send our kids to a great private school, I stay home with my kids, we vacation several times a year. I am living a very comfortable and happy life. Just shows how out of touch YOU are if you think 100 k isn’t enough to be comfortable on. If I wanted more money I’d go back to work. It’s as simple as that for me, but I have a graduate degree and a license to practice law.

        My fight is not for people like me, who are indeed very comfortable. It is for the countless individuals and families I have worked with who struggle more than I can ever imagine. I devoted several years of my legal career trying to help them. For some of them I saw hope. But for many of them I couldn’t imagine a way out of their situation, no matter how hard I tried. Many of these were hard working individuals who worked 2 or more jobs just to get by. It really is depressing, and I am not the kind of person who can simply say “f- them, at least I live well.”

        Moving, for them, is not about having to leave their child’s little league team. Most of them don’t have the time or money to participate in things like that anyway. Many of them don’t have computers or Internet, so FS’s argument that anyone can work from anywhere fails.

        1. In response to FS’s comment below:
          No idea how much time or money I have donated this year. I don’t keep track every time I donate a pack of diapers or a can of food or a jar of peanut butter. We just finished a box for operation Christmas child–probably $30 or so, but since it’s coming out of disposable income, I don’t really know. My husband keeps track of the weekly contributions we make to our church, and the monthly contributions we make to our homeless shelter.

          No idea how much volunteer time either–that varies from week to week and even month to month, depending on what is going on in my personal life. I have a two year old who goes to daycare two mornings each week, and the rest of the time she is with me. I just finished up a pro bono case that probably took 40-50 hours. Others I have done took considerably more. I do what I can, and whe mynchildren are older I will do more. They are my priority right now.

          But you’re not really interested in what I’ve done, nor am I really interested in advertising it. You were just hoping to prove a point.

          Feel free to have the last word–on this or any other argument I’ve posted. We will never change each others mind’s taking jabs back and forth, so it’s really just a waste of time. I’d rather play Memory with my kids.

        2. and there are plenty of people that are more than satisfied with the amount of hours they work but not with the money.. and will not do anything to change their situation. I have heard at LEAST a dozen times “I can’t do that” or “I wouldn’t want to do that” or “I’d be no good at that”. I’ve attempted to hire AT LEAST a dozen people that have told me those things but yet have made no attempt at doing what I do. Everyone that works for me works no more than 30 a week and no one is pacing under 60k. I don’t dictate their hours or how many hours they are to work and they are ALL on commission. You earn what you are worth. But seriously, how many people do you know that wouldn’t DREAM of not getting paid to stand at the water cooler? I run into them every single day.

          And trust this, NO ONE earning 30k a year would agree that moving would be financially difficult for YOU. To them, you are RICH.

  221. All I know is I work 52-60 hours a week and I make 35000.00 a year. I am a single parent and get no support from the government and I have a hard time making ends meet. I rent and do very little for entertainment and am paycheck to paycheck and I pay 736 a month in federal and local taxes. So I pay right at 10000 a year in taxes and struggle daily living and supporting my children. So I feel the poor pay their fair share of taxes. The problem is the government gives welfare with no restrictions. I believe a person should be required to work at least 20 hrs. or more to get help and have to pass drug/alcohol tests to get the thousands of dollars a year in help. I don’t care to have my taxes help someone if they are making an effort to help themselves. But the people who don’t work and get subsided rent and foodstamps and insurance and they do nothing that’s what’s not fair. But if you work you pay taxes so instead of fighting over that why not fight to stop bums from getting everything handed to them. If you are trying to get a head you get no help but if your willing to do nothing for yourself then our government will give you anything? That’s our problem in America and our other problem is NAFTA.

    1. Darek, thanks for your thoughts. I really hope at the end of the year, you get a nice tax refund, b/c paying an effective 30% of your 35K/year income sounds high. Hope you get that $1,000/child/year tax credit.

  222. it should be noted that the IRS statistics on AGI are for individuals, not households, and don’t include capital gains or dividends, and that the threshold for the top 1% is about $380k per year, while the top 0.1% of individuals earn over 1.4 million a year and represent less than 150,000 people. Wealth consolidation is higher in America today than it was in 1929. So many people are passionate about defending the ‘fairness’ to this small, super rich sector of the population. Personally, I’d let the super rich and their wide array of staff do the defense work. Worry about what taxes the top 1% pays when you join their illustrious ranks. In the meantime, do a reality check on what taxes the bottom 50% pay – AGI doesn’t count the PAYROLL TAX. And just to get really real, taxes don’t just go down a big toilet. They pay for so much – we all drive on roads, for example, right? None of us are so righteous because we have our own roads? Or our own armies? No bombs whistling outside my windows, thanks. Taxes pay for police and fire departments, coast guard and air traffic control, public schools, the massive system of international customs, trade, and immigration, oversight for everything from food to finances, social service programs that keep starving kids out of doorways and streets (soooo annoying when I’m trying to drive through in my Land Rover)…the list is endless, and all American citizens reap the benefits of tax dollars at work every day of our lives, just through the normalcy of a country with functioning statehood. I mean, is anyone really longing for SF to look like more like Mumbai? I’m glad to pay my taxes, and I am bumping pretty close to the top 1%. I’m glad because I’m a patriot, and I do not expect to get government services for free and do not begrudge helping others….jeeze…someone who thought that way would have a serious entitlement attitude.

    1. I second that! Why don’t more people realize that (1) taxes really aren’t the worst thing to have to pay–they fund our roads, for one thing, and (2) they aren’t the top 1%! I have a few friends who would fall in the top 1% (at least based on this chart) and it makes sense that they would want to lower their taxes. But so many people are voting against their own best interest and don’t even realize it!

      1. People who say taxes “aren’t the worst thing” are the one’s who aren’t being asked to pay more taxes, and who already pay most of the taxes already.

        I don’t mind tax increases if you pay for it and I don’t! That’s the logic here.

  223. This is a great article!!! But you have to read between the lines. I learned that the largest income in the U.S. makes $1,031,512,000,000 TAX FREE!!! Our government brings this much in for taxes and still is asking for more!!! This just confirms my belief that if you are not competent enough to balance your budget, you should not be re-elected (for both liberals and conservatives). STOP ASKING FOR MORE FROM THE POOR, THE MIDDLE CLASS, AND THE RICH!!! We can tax any of these three groups more and it will not matter if our government continues to out spend it’s own budget and borrow from other countries.

  224. I am trying to figure out how all these people are claiming that working minimum wage can get you by. Have you ever actually done it? Not all states have a comfy $10 minimum.

    I work two minimum wage jobs in NY because no one is hiring. Even minimum wage jobs here are far and few between. I was once told by McDonalds that since I have college experience, I was overqualified(wtf?!) for the job and they wouldn’t hire me. I have had to choose between paying rent or eating. My credit score has plummeted since I haven’t been able to keep up with payments on my student loans.

    Jobs are so scarce that I have seen people apply to hundreds of jobs (even mall, minimum wage ones) in their town and surrounding areas and receive no offer for an interview.
    Then, when people do manage to get hired, even if people wanted to work 40 and 60 hours a week, not every job is willing to hand that out. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen someone get hired and start working at 30 hours a week, only to have their hours slowly dwindled down to the point it where it would cost them more money in gas than what they actually earn.

    Minimum wage in NY: $7.35
    40 hours a week: $294
    Then cut out for taxes.
    Actually earnings: around $200 a week.

    That wouldn’t be bad, but this is what most people are experiencing:

    Minimum Wage: $7.35
    25 hours a week (since thats all they can get): $183.75
    Actual earnings: about $135 a week
    Actual earnings per month: $540

    Add a second job at minimum wage.
    But you can only get 15 hours that don’t interfere with your other job: $110.25
    Actual earnings: around $90
    Per month: $360

    Total: $900 per month

    Now the breakdown (based on someone living by themselves):
    Rent: $595
    Utilities: $45
    Electric: $50
    Food: $100
    Gas: $100
    TOTAL: $890

    Leaving you with an extra $20 a month.
    I don’t know about you but that isn’t much to go off of, say for: Car insurance, emergency car repairs, doctors visits (since you don’t get health care or insurance at part time hours). And god help you if you have a child or pet to take care of.

    My father would be classified in the “top 10%” bracket of these statistics.
    But I vividly remember my family struggling with debt and bills.
    I remember having to help my mother scrounge up nickles and dimes to put gas in the gastank. How we couldn’t afford to eat healthy. And how we were always worried about heating the house during the winter.

    There is something very wrong with this economy when someone has to break their back working at minimum wage (and even above!) to barely survive while fat cats and corporations get off without paying taxes. And do you know how degrading it feels to work at minimum wage or food service when you busted ass in college and have dreams you can’t pursue? Then tack on the mental and physical exhaustion from working in customer service and it is in no way a “comfortable way of living”.
    Fuck minimum wage.
    Fuck this backwards economy.
    And fuck the 1%.

    1. I’m surprised you pay 30% of your income to taxes earning minimum wage. You sure about this?

      I don’t think people with minimum wage jobs have cars and pay car insurance. Isn’t that kinda a disconnect?

      Why not just start an online business for $20 bucks a year? It costs $12 to get a URL.

      1. You don’t think people with minimum wage jobs have cars? Did I read that right.
        Goes to show you how out of touch you are.

        I don’t believe the 30% tax rate for
        minimun wage either unless you are using payroll deductions, then it sounds
        about right. You should get all or most of your fed taxs back at the end of the
        year, but not state, or local taxes, which keep going up because there is less
        money coming from the fed.

        1. When I worked minimum wage I didn’t have a car. You know why? Because I could t afford a car! None of my min wage friends had cars too.

          How do you afford a car if you earn min wage? I believe one needs to make 10 times the value or the car to justify buying that car. So if you make $20k, the most you should buy is a 2k car. Hence, why bother wasting this money?

          I take the bus.

        2. Wow, it must be awesome to live in a city where you have public transportation. I know that we do not! We do have a taxi service, but it is located 37 miles away- imagine those charges when you’re living on minimum wage at a max of 27 hours a week!

          My office is located 15 miles away. There is only one way to get there: by car. We do not have carpooling groups here, meaning unless you want to bike to work 30 miles every day, round trip, then the only other option is to get your own car. And with your own car, comes your own gas bill, and your own car insurance bill.

          In essence, the job it took me more than eight months to get costs me more than I get paid. But I would never leave it, since it is the ONLY job I’ve been able to land at all since I’ve gotten out of high school.

          If only I had a bus, right?

      2. You must live in a large city with good public transportation. I live in a small city that is the capital of a rural state. The lower income people I have worked with through my former job and through volunteer work would sometimes take the bus, but would often choose to walk 5 or more miles to wherever they were going because the bus system is so lousy. The ones living in the city had that option. But I have also worked with many individuals in rural areas and in smaller cities without any transportation system. For them public transportation isn’t even an option.

        Public transportation, at least here, is largely funded by tax money. Every year it almost gets cut. And yet people want to cut taxes, which could effectively end the public transportation system, and then tell minimum wage earners to just take the bus! It doesn’t make sense.

        1. San Francisco is expensive. At least we have pub transportation. At least living in a rural area is way cheaper for everything else.

          What’s wrong with having people who use the bus, pay for the bus? I’m not following you on the taxes.

  225. Stacie in Boston

    You sound like a real asshole. Plus, doesn’t it occur to you that, while one might make more money in SF than other places, you also pay about 50% in housing and other cost of living expenses. You are just plain dumb. Plus, it’s ridiculous to think that everyone should be working 60 hours a week, when 40 hours is the standard work week in all industries, and other countries get along just fine with even less than that. Fact is that the 40 hours is just in place to control people and keep them from looking up to see that they are being exploited AND NO ONE does even 40 hours of work a week. it’s just not possible to sustain that long. check out the water cooler, lunch and break area, the use of the Internet for non work purposes and email, and you can see that at most 4 hours of work is actually done a day and the rest wasted because we just HAVE to be there. You are an idiot. AND, a whiner. You sound pissed off that you have to work so much, also.

    1. Stacie,

      I don’t take quite as strict of view as the author (I believe that you shouldn’t tax poverty level earners) but we all have our opinions which are based on our situation. No one way is right for everyone. But I do firmly agree with his point of working more than your standard 40 hour week if you want to get ahead. He didn’t say you should be FORCED to work more than 40 hours…. just don’t complain that the person who does sacrifice a part of their life by working harder than most needs to pay more taxes than they do. I was a high school dropout making minimum wage with no help from anyone and it sucked! I learned early on that if I worked harder than anyone around me I would then be rewarded by raises that were way above average. I kept that going for a while and made it up into the top 5%. Two years ago, with the worst economy I’ve seen in my lifetime, I decided that I no longer wanted to depend on working for large companies as I didn’t feel secure. I started a business with some other co-workers (cost a lot of time and money). Business is good an I’m almost earning what I did before but now have a chance to be in the top 3% in the next 2-3 years. I WORKED MY A$$ OFF but am now doing it from home so I can always be close to my family. My point is this…. there’s absolutely nothing wrong with working 40 hours a week, taking your 1 hour lunch, taking your 10 minute breaks, and clocking out at exactly 5:00. Just don’t tell me that I need to pay more taxes because I’m working hard at 6:00 when you’re sitting on the couch with a beer in your hand.
      BTW… in another year I’ll be dropping my hours down to 30 per week so I can enjoy the rewards of all my hard work.

      1. Since when was making 33k or less poverty? Of course if someone is in poverty, I’m not askig them to pay more or perhaps any federL taxes. But if you are a single person and earning 15-20k+ a year, you should contribute some federal income taxes, even if it is just $25 a month! $0 is not acceptable, especially since we should give more than we take.

        Other than that, I congratulate you for your success and understanding that anybody who only works 40 hours a week and complains is completely delusional!

      2. Mark Webber

        You worked your ass off eh and soon you’ll be working 30 hrs a week? Hummmm, sounds like you’ll retire before your 40 hr a week counter part. Probably a lot more in the bank too while your counter part works for another 20 years or so. Who will be sitting on the couch then eh? I’ll bet Mr. 40hrs a week will be wondering why you have such a good life then. You will say you earned it. How, by selling to people like him or hiring people like him. Without those 40 hr people you would have nothing. I suppose you think you don’t owe them anything. You probably feel that you don’t owe Democracy and Freedom anything as well. Well keep you money for yourself like the rich say they want to and see if anything happens to America or Democracy. You get what you pay for. Ever heard that expression? Probably don’t care.

        1. Mark,

          I appreciate the insults. So here’s what I understand from your post:
          You believe I’m anti-American and don’t care about democracy or people who work 40 hours a week. Does that about sum it up?

          My perspective:
          I’m creating those 40 hour a week jobs. The lowest salary in our company is 55k. We provide medical and dental care to all employees at no cost to them. We sell our product to small businesses to better help them. I find it strange that you seem to be against this. Doesn’t this freedom that you throw out there apply to EVERYONE… the freedom for people like myself to be rewarded for working hard and being creative. I think it’s time you come out of the closet. You like to talk about America, Democracy, and Freedom but your opinions better match one that prefers a Socialist government. You state that I probably don’t care but I do pay A LOT in taxes to help our great country. How about you?

          And by the way, you’re also wrong that I’ll retire before my 40 hour a week counter part. I enjoy being creative in my field and also enjoy coming to work. I just prefer to spend more time with my family and my hard work is going to allow me to accomplish this.

      3. Mark Webber

        My point is simple and should have been easily picked up by someone as creative and out of the closet like yourself. (why you had to infer I was in the closet kind of sets the tone here) Anyone who wants to work for you for 40 hrs I suspect works equally as hard as you do during those 40 hrs. Just because they decide to end work after 40 hrs does not devalue the amount done in those 40 hrs.
        You said “Just don’t tell me that I need to pay more taxes because I’m working hard at 6:00 when you’re sitting on the couch with a beer in your hand.” To infer that that there is alcohol involved would be an insult for many for one thing. The other point is that for every employee that you hire increases the companies net worth. Their hard work gains your company and they don’t keep any of that gain except maybe there job itself. The company does gain and if you decide to sell it someday that increase goes into your pocket and the shareholders pocket.
        Then you say ” I find it strange that you seem to be against this.” Why would anyone be against this? That is what the free market society is all about. Bully for you and all that you do. I think it is great that you have the initiative and drive to help so many along with helping America. My whole point is that power and wealth comes the responsibility to pay to your great county it’s fair share. The country is owed a debt for providing a free market society where someone like yourself can gain great favour, wealth and social standing. We are indebted to Lady Liberty for not asking more of us. Many so-called free market driven societies are actually driven by fear. Many back door or under the table deals are run in those counties using prostitutes and threats of violence to accomplish their drive for power and wealth. How would you like it if the mob started breathing down your neck forcing your hand to use their inferior materials or to sell at a lower price to specific clients? Complaining in those 3rd world countries to the police could get you killed or worse since so many are corrupt to the highest levels. Paying bribes to city officials is common place. Many end up in prison for not doing as they are told. Pay your taxes and be grateful that you must pay more than before. When Ronald Regan took office he lowered taxes for the wealthy. Be grateful that tax levels don’t go back to that. Consider that you do get what you pay for, your freedom!

        One more thing, your hard work creates something that is yours. I can understand this. I have hobbies that help me create something nice, better than it was before and it is mine. Pride comes from that and it is fun. So when you said ” And by the way, you’re also wrong that I’ll retire before my 40 hour a week counter part. I enjoy being creative in my field and also enjoy coming to work.” This just tells me your retirement is being put off by choice. To compare that to your 40 hr/week counterpart is absurd since he/she works to eat and have a family. Ya, you do too but you also work for that 30 hr work week that is out of reach for most of your employees. If they cut back their hours to 30 then they would practically be on the bread line. So congratulations on all the options and rewards, hard work and “creativity” have provided you. You should be grateful enough to pay more for your taxes since you owe more to America than anyone at your company. This is not an insult to you sir. I would hold my head up high and expect respect from others for the role you play in America. I would thank you personally if I worked for you. All your employees are indebted to you and you are indebted to America. Your employees are also indebted to America for not having to work for slave wages which is also something that plagues 3rd world nations. Best of luck in your endeavours.

    2. other countries aren’t getting along just fine with less than 40 hours. Or maybe you don’t realize that most of Europe is on fire every other day?

  226. I also would like to know from where did Rush base his claim saying that earning 50,000 dlls puts you in the upper 10% of wage earners. I have been looking at wikipedia and 15% would be above 100,000 dlls.

    1. How can $50K put you in the top 10% of wage earners, when the median household income is around $50-$55K?

      Doesn’t make sense. My chart is what it is. Top 10% at $113,000 sounds about right.

  227. Estella Lauter

    What jumps out at me is that the column about the group share of tax payments does not add up to 100%! That means funny business as far as I am concerned. If the IRS really did make this table, the funny business may have originated there. In any case, we need better statistics before we make any policy decisions.

    I also question the validity of the column on effective rates of tax payments based upon my own experience. I actually pay the top rate that is reported (23.27%) although I am not even close to earning the amount cited for the top 5%, to say nothing of the top 1% for which this rate is quoted. Something is seriously wrong with this information, folks.

  228. This does not take into account that within the top 1 % there is a huge range. The 99th percentile earner at 380 K is probably paying taxes at the top tax rate with their avg tax rate a bit lower. But the top 400 starts at income over 109 million and paid an avg tax rate of 18% (2008). So if you are lucky enough to be near the 99th percentile and living comfortably, you are still closer to the bottom than to the top of the income scale, and those above you, who make more than your lifetime earnings in a single year are paying less tax than you. Our capital gains tax system has created an inverted tax scale with ultra rich paying less tax.

    1. It is truly those 400 income earners that the OWS and most Americans are upset over, somehow they think the 1% is those people, only. I, until, looking around, thought that the 400 was all that was considered to be in the 1%, as well.
      However, those that are of what I’d consider poverty level (less than 1 or more family hh – $20,000/annually) should not be considered to be those with their hand outs, most of them don’t qualify for any ‘entitlements’, as everyone assumes. Until the HCR is in place, unless you’re what the Government considers poverty level. If you don’t fall within their guidelines, you don’t qualify, and if you do, it’s very minimal. At times, they may offer $10-$20 worth of aid for food, if you’re close to the cut off, or they may put the children on medical assistance, while not providing it to the parent(s). It’s not as cut and dry as people tend to think.

      Supposedly, once the HCR is in place Medical Assistance will become available to those that fall within 300% above the guidelines. Until then, most are living only off of their small paychecks.

  229. We all live on the planet together. We should conserve and share its resources. The distribution of wealth in OUR world is disgusting, something has to be done. We need to form a new system that is more fair and more sustainable.

    1. When I started in my industry I went 6 months without a paycheck. I lost my apartment, moved onto my mom’s couch and dug my heals in. Then I learned how to do my job WELL and did very well at it. One thing that I would marvel at in my office was that my colleages would laugh at me for the distances I would go to earn so little money. Well, while they were sitting in their offices earning NOTHING, I was driving 150 miles one way to earn $100 net. I would even go that far or more to net $20!!! They just didn’t get it. However, every month consistantly I had top production and that top production allowed me to leave that office and open one of my own. Should I have “shared” my commission with the others in the office because they didn’t have any? They didn’t want to get in the car! They didn’t want to leave their bubble for such a small amount. It just wasn’t worth their time.

      Also, in school I had a piddly 3.2 GPA but there were plenty of kids/young adults that had a lower GPA. Should I have “shared” my grades? Is it FAIR that I understood something better than the guy/girl next to me in class while we both put in the same amount of time/effort? Is it FAIR that I put in more effort TO understand that subject than someone else?

  230. its all moot anyway….. those with their hands out have finally figured out how to vote themselves the money out of the treasury…. hope and (spare) change. What I don’t understand is how non achievers can have the gall to actually think its somehow owed to them like they earned it… by what? Being born? Well therein lies the fix…. instead of abortion vs. continued lifetime care costs down the road, lets just avoid both. Every responsible parent out there should be clamoring for some kind of parental reform where you need to show enough competence to even have a child much less not have it instantly be born into neglectful/abusive conditions in a country where 5 children under 5 are abused to death every day and infants are occasionally placed in a microwave. Don’t ask me how, I don’t have all the answers but until then, if you want fair, then fair is fair and a flat tax is just that…. be careful what you wish for. Great post btw FS

  231. my first reaction to this article is that it’s bullshit. my second reaction is that i need to confirm your statistics. my third is that there is an agenda to convince me that socialism is the right of all ways. what i think is that we are a corporation of people that need to learn balance…..and our government, because of it segregation amongst its state politics, is failing to represent the people as a whole. i work damn hard, i should be able to make a living – a real living regardless of where i am. no i don’t want socialistic society. i want equality – justice – and freedom. how does that fit in to this entire perspective of label?

  232. I noted with interest the person earlier who told the high achiever to “get a life” and that working 60+ hours per week (as he claimed to have done) was somehow wrong. This is a perfect example of someone who made choices but is unwilling to accept the consequences of their decision(s). Person (A) chose to put quality family time over working extended hours. This is a respectable and noble decision and I support his right to make it. Person (B) chose to sacrifice some family time to acquire a greater number of material possessions and/or a larger bank account. There is nothing wrong with this choice either and I support his right to make it. Why is person (B) now a villain in person (A)’s mind and why should he (Person (B)) now be forced to share the fruits of his labor with the person (A)s of this world? I’m assuming both were adults when these decisions were made. I assume both were in full possession of their mental facilities when they made these choices. I assume both “knew” the consequences of these divergent choices. This mindset truly baffles me.

    1. Because it’s the B people claiming that parenting has fallen to the way side, when talking about poor people, but they can’t see that they, themselves, are not home enough to offer the time to their own children, whom will grow up thinking ‘daddy loved his job and material possessions more than me’. I’ve known people whom had parents whom did this, and they are far from being well adjusted adults because of it. Most have stated they would have preferred to have grown up in a family like those of the friends whom had less money, less material things, because the overall family unit was so much loving, and you could feel it as soon as you walked into their home. It’s not about money, when it comes to family, it is about nurture.

      1. Amen Welcome to MY world Mr. Financial Samurai MY family is happy, healthy, but struggling. When I was a child, I missed my father a lot because he worked so much overtime. You can’t replace time with money. Again I feel sorry for you Mr. Financial Samurai.

  233. Life is all about choices and accepting the inevitable consequences of these choices (both bad and good). The “choice ” to have children, the “choice” to strive for a good education, the “choice” to have a spouse earning a 2nd income vice being a stay at home parent, the “choice” to not spend more than you earn or the “choice” to do the opposite, the “choice” to tithe you your church (or not), the “Choice” to take expensive vacations, purchase a new car every 2-3 years, or “not” save towards your retirement. All of these “choices” have consequences (both good and bad depending on one’s perspective). I made the “choice” to work hard and now enjoy the benefits of a 5% lifestyle despite only having a high-school education. My wife and I made “choices” to have 3 children, tithe to our church and for her to be a homemaker. Had we made different choices, we’d probably be in the top 1%. The choices we made to put family, children, and church over more income were (in our opinions) best and well worth not being as well off (financially) as we could have been. That being the case, I harbor no animosity towards another couple who followed a parallel life path but with different family “choices” that now enjoy a higher standard of living than I. They made “choices” to sacrifice to get where they are and I made others. Why would I now vilify them and demand that they balance out their bank accounts with mine to cover the consequences of the decisions I, as an adult, made? I’ve known many (what Americans call) poor people over my life and in almost every circumstance, I can tie their current financial positions to the decisions they’ve made over their lifetimes. I’ve also spent two decades living and working in some of the poorest (and I mean truly poor) places in the world. These people live on 300$ per year not because of bad decisions but due to lack of opportunity. We’ve no such excuses in America where even the poorest of our poor would be in the top 5% on a global scale. As has become all too common in our “entitlement” obsessed society, we just want others to pay the consequences of our poor “choices”.

    1. Is it your “choice” if the company you work for outsources your job over seas? It’s the rich who feel entitled to do whatever they want to do.

    2. I agree with this message. It was my choice to get into work at 5:30am and leave at 7:30pm on average everyday for the first two years after college b/c I wanted to learn and build a good foundation.

      It is my choice that I love to eat rib-eye steaks and lemon meringue pie, which is why I still don’t have 4-pack abs.

      Sometimes, we don’t have a choice. But, I think everybody has a choice to work harder, be better, and get into the top 50% of income earners.

  234. Rush stated that people making $50,000 are in the top 10% of wage earners. Do you have a source that supports that data? Thank you in advance.

  235. Really your arguement is for equality that someone making $380K/year should only have to pay $76K in taxes (20%) So therefore if I make $15K/year I should pay $3K? Lets see so that leaves you $304K after taxes and me $12k. This is ridicioulious you should feel thankful to live in a country where you can be so wealthy, plus you are getting value from these people making $15K/year. You said it yourself if everyone makes a million dollars your million dollars isn’t worth so much as you will have to pay more for everything to support your wages. I have no problem covering the bottom 50% of workers some lazy drunk is the poster child but most of these people work much harder than the top 1% and life has handed them a bad hand.

  236. I hate when these things don’t discuss expendable income. You can’t calculate the tax burden on any group without comparing the income they have left over after taxes. That’s the true impact of taxation. If you’re living paycheck to paycheck and you’re paying out 20 to 30% in income tax than you’re carrying a heavier tax burden. If your expendable income allows you to buy yachts, Rose Royces, and take 50k plus vacations then 40 or even 50% isn’t much of a tax burden. The money you have left after taxes is the impact of taxation, not the percentage that you pay. Even the upper middle class would experience a heavier burden, due to limiting savings. While this class can afford some of the more expensive things life has to offer they have to do so with great consideration and through saving as well as planning. So they have to take taxes into account before making these plans; therefore the tax burden falls heavier on them than it does the super rich. If you want the real story about taxes you have to look up information that compares expendable income.

  237. For me It’s not so much about jobs or taxes. Occupy is about getting corperatations out of our goverment and give it back to the people

  238. I think the world is about to see who loses what. And I’d be willing to wager that folks such as yourself are not going to be pleased with the results. We’re already seeing that the enacted austerity measures are not only not working, but making the problem worse. As they scramble for a new plan (deeper austerity, of course), I can’t help but anticipate an overall shift towards a more direct democracy, by force if need be, from the very country that invented it.

  239. Isn’t it odd that many of those listed as doing just as well, if not better than the U.S., happen to have many of those evil socialist safety nets that we are meant to despise and fear as the harbingers of every imaginable nightmare? Something to consider.

  240. Mike Marcus

    Seems like you are trying to buttress your cause and building a case by using skewed or false numbers.
    Please see what the CBO has to say about after tax earnings by top 1% etc. cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3220
    Now I suggest you re write your article with the correct figures.

    1. Mike Marcus

      Sorry, I meant to point out in my above post that the CBO figures show the top 1% earning, (after taxes) 1.3 million, not 380K. and that from 2007. I’m sure it has risen greatly since then.

  241. Robin Van Ausdall

    I would like to challenge the author to spend 90 days doing what he or she proposes. If it’s easy and (s)he is of superior intellect and work ethic, it shouldn’t be a problem, right? We could make a reality show.

  242. Average Guy

    I worked minimum wage jobs for the first 4 years I was married. I jumped from one job to another for 16 years acquiring new skills at each one. When I was 38, I borrowed on my house and started my own business. Now, after 6 years in business, I still work 60-80 hours a week. The thing is, this hard work is what got me to the 5%. Anyone can do it, it just takes drive and determination. I am a high school drop-out. So stop crying about your situation and change it.

    1. 60 to 80 hours weeks? I feel sorry for you. get a life. I worked 60 hour weeks as a manager bringing in about 30k. I hardly saw my family. tons of stress, etc. If you want to trade your life for money go a head. you deserve double what I make. To be in the top 1% you need to make over a million a year. 30 times what I earn. If your in the top 5% you are NOT an average guy as your name suggests. Most small businesses fail. It also takes timing and a bit of luck to get where you are. most don’t make it. I don’t know what your business is but I bet your employees aren’t even in the top 50% and I’m sure they work hard too. Go ahead and tax the poor. watch the crime rate and poverty sore. Just buy more security systems. I feel sorry for you. I’m sorry Steve Jobs is dead, but I’m glad he is gone. I’d bet some people will feel the same when your time comes.

      1. I feel sorry for you that you only make 30K and had to work 60 hours and never saw your family. Look at it this way, someone has to do your job, so it might as well be you. Thx

        1. Here’s your reply:

          “I didn’t know hot dog stand owners made so much as to put them in the top 5%
          I work at a Vocational Rehab in mid management earning less than 30k. I help
          disabled people learn the skills to get off of social security and into the work force..
          My career is rewarding in no-monetary ways, but I still have bills to pay. We
          wouldn’t need to raise taxes on anyone if our government would stop pissing
          away hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, Afghanistan and maybe next Iran.
          Unjust wars that are costing lives and money just to make our country less
          secure. Oh but wait, then companies such as General Electric couldn’t rake in
          billions on defense contracts. War is big business and you need a war to make
          the big bucks. We don’t need to raise any ones taxes if we got big corporations
          out of our government, stopped the fear mongering bullshit and gave control
          back to the people where it belongs! That’s what ows is all about.”

          OK, first-take your lithium.

          Next, in my area there is a man who owns approximately 26 VERY SUCCESSFUL hot dog stands. I don’t know his personal finances, but I’d say he’s in the top 5%.

          Maybe your job is rewarding. And thats fine. In fact I applaud you for having a job that you enjoy.

          But here’s the reality.

          Our deficit this year is $1.6 TRILLION. There are approximately 310 million people in the US.
          Divide 310 million into $1.6 TRILLION. Thats roughly $5,000 for every man woman and child. Thats just the deficit. That doesn’t include government spending that is covered by taxes.

          Here’s a little more. Current US national debt is approximately $15 TRILLION.
          Thats over $45,000 for every man, woman and child.

          You said:
          “We
          wouldn’t need to raise taxes on anyone if our government would stop pissing
          away hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, Afghanistan and maybe next Iran.

          The problem is government spending is out of control. Whether from the wars or other issues. The bailouts were a joke (except no one is laughing, except the bailout recipients and the politicians). You mention 100’s of billions the government is spending on the wars. Actual current numbers are about $160 BILLION per year. About 1/10 of the current deficit.
          So in the grand scheme of things, your little rant about the cost of the wars is minor, when compared to overall spending.
          This has nothing to do with whether the wars are just or unjust, or views about the war. Just cold hard facts.
          Here’s another cold hard fact.
          Look up the Forbes top 400 in the US. You will find there are 403 Billionaires in the US. Add up all their estimated wealth.
          What do you get?
          Answer: About $1.3 TRILLION

          So what does this mean?

          If you were able to confiscate the entire net worth of all the US billionaires, it would not match THIS YEARS deficit (even without the cost of the wars).

          Funny thing, if you were able to confiscate the wealth of all the billionaires, just to offset THIS YEARS deficit, there wouldn’t be anything for next years deficit. You see wealth is not income.

          My point being, raising taxes won’t change the problem. There isn’t enough income or wealth source to sustain our current spending. Even for the next few years.

          You rail against the corporations. Is some of that founded? Yes.
          But by and large, the so called “greed” of corporations is exagerated and a boogie man.

          Here’s some tax numbers for you.
          42% of federal government tax revenues come from personal income taxes. Thats you and me.
          40% are FICA taxes.
          9% are corporate taxes.
          9% are miscellaneous taxes.

          Corporate taxes make up only 9% of total taxes collected.
          Corporate tax rates are 35%
          US corporate tax rates are the highest of all the industrialized nations.

          Point being, raising corporate taxes won’t solve anything, either.

          You said:
          “We don’t need to raise any ones taxes if we got big corporations
          out of our government, stopped the fear mongering bullshit and gave control
          back to the people where it belongs! That’s what ows is all about.”

          You and OWS are a little slow on the uptake.
          The Tea Party marched on DC 3 years ago, complaing about the bailouts and government spending and the raising of taxes.

          The difference being, our march on Washington was about 1.6 million people vs a few hundred at this rally or a couple of hundred at that rally.
          We didn’t s#!t on cop cars or in parks.
          We left DC as clean as we found it.
          We didn’t push cops or cause problems. We peacefully demonstrated…then left.
          Most of us had jobs. We gathered on Saturday, and went back to work on Monday. OWS…???
          We demonstarted. We gathered, spoke our piece and left. We didn’t disrupt lives or push people or stop normal activity.
          We bathed… Before AND after our demonstration.

        2. I hope I am repling to mountn man. Actually we agree on a lot. you are right, there isn’t enough wealth to pay the debit. as for the war? 160 billion over 10 years is 1.6 trillion.
          Even this would not pay the debt. yes I saw the picture of some guy defacating on a police car and it’s disgusting, but not as disgusting as marine vet Olson getting shot in the head with tear gas. Of course you get a few bads ones in every group, cops or protesters. However I see a lot more of the home videos with police abusing citizens. Yes the tea party moved on and are soon forgotten. At least we can agree that raising taxes will not fix the mess we are in and this mess started long ago and crosses party lines.

      2. “I don’t know what your business is but I bet your employees aren’t even in the top 50% and I’m sure they work hard too.”

        There is a reason why his employees “MIGHT” not be in the top 50%. First, we have no idea what his business is. If he owns a hot dog stand his workers aren’t going to be paid much. Its not his responsibility to pay them more than they’re worth.

        Second HE IS the one working 60-80 hrs a week. If they aren’t, its they’re fault they aren’t in the top 50%.

        There is something else to look at as to why he’s in the top 5%. He’s the one invested. If he’s working 60-80 hrs, his labor alone should be making him $100k or more a year. Then if he has $250k invested, that ought to make him another $25k minimum.

        As an employer he must pay, out of his own pocket, 7.65% of his employees income, in FICA taxes. So for EVERY employee who makes $40k, as an employer he must pay $2,860. Add to that unemployment taxes. (In Illinois, its 6% on the first $12,500 for construction workers, thats $750 per person, if there is a claim it goes up)

        Lets talk about insurance just to operate his business.

        The owner is the one working 60-80 hrs a week. Has HIS money invested in the business. Pays taxes out of his pocket for having employees. We have no idea what the employees might do, but automatically, according to you, should be in the top 50%.

        1. I didn’t know hot dog stand owners made so much as to put them in the top 5%
          I work at a Vocational Rehab in mid management earning less than 30k. I help
          disabled people learn the skills to get off of social security and into the work force..
          My career is rewarding in no-monetary ways, but I still have bills to pay. We
          wouldn’t need to raise taxes on anyone if our government would stop pissing
          away hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, Afghanistan and maybe next Iran.
          Unjust wars that are costing lives and money just to make our country less
          secure. Oh but wait, then companies such as General Electric couldn’t rake in
          billions on defense contracts. War is big business and you need a war to make
          the big bucks. We don’t need to raise any ones taxes if we got big corporations
          out of our government, stopped the fear mongering bullshit and gave control
          back to the people where it belongs! That’s what ows is all about.

      3. ” If your in the top 5% you are NOT an average guy as your name suggests. ”

        “I don’t know what your business is but I bet your employees aren’t even in the top 50% and I’m sure they work hard too.”

        “I’m sorry Steve Jobs is dead, but I’m glad he is gone. I’d bet some people will feel the same when your time comes.”

        You’re pissed off this guy isn’t average.
        The average guy doesn’t work 60-80 hrs a week.
        The average guy doesn’t invest money into his own business.
        The average business doesn’t succeed.
        The average person doesn’t make the top 5% of the income earners.

        You know nothing about him, but you know his employees don’t make it into the top 50%.

      4. I’d like to add that anonymous and groups like that are criminals and NOT
        affiliated with OWS. OWS is a peaceful demonstration.

    2. Unfortunately the majority of those, as we are now certainly seeing amidst this economic crisis of ours, did much the same as you claim (borrowed on their home to start a business), and lost it all in the process. Most will not do as you have done, not out of intrinsic laziness or lack of want, but because we make the endeavor too risky. A few strike gold, while many more end up living a nightmare. And though Steve Jobs’ death is not uplifting to me, many, MANY people die from cancer each year who haven’t abused labor, and aren’t globally mourned, though their deaths might very well have left an already financially strained family in even more dire straits.

  243. Take it from someone who is in the top 1% in America. If you put the TIME, EFFORT, and ENERGY into creating your income, you also would be here with me. Whether it be education or business, if you do nothing but go to work and get your paycheck, well that’s all you get. What do you think, it’s pure luck??? Get off your ass and do it. You do nothing, you get nothing. Why should I pay more in taxes to drive on the same road as you all that are not paying what I do??? Only in America do we punish the ones that put forth the effort. Oh…..I got to the top with having kids also.

  244. You fail to recognize that the bottom 50% are working to pay for the basic necessities and that adding $43 a month to expenses eats into those necessities, while adding $100 or $500 a month (or whatever) to the top 1% or 5% doesn’t cramp them at all. You want equality? First make health care available to everyone regardless of income. All those other top 10 countries do that. Your concept of equality is perverted.

    1. As a first responder I know first hand that health care is available to everyone even those who can’t pay.

      1. Duh. It’s the cost of health care who can’t afford it (emergency rooms etc. due to lack of an efficient health care system) that is driving the the cost of health care to impossible heights.. You don’t get it do you.

        1. Netminder13

          Chuck it’s you who don’t get it. Obamacare isn’t going to fix it. All that will do is make people with jobs like me pay more for what is already in place. Obamacare is not going to change how things are run only how it’s paid for. I already pay enough for healthcare and don’t want to pay more

        2. Really the basic problem with healthcare isn’t the Insurance Companies, Obamacare or any of the rest of it. Frankly it’s that specialist doctors make many hundreds of thousands of dollars (even hundreds of thousands more then doctors in the rest of the first world) without actually producing any economic value.

          If the United States was a country medical care would be part of “overhead” in that it does provide a benefit but doesn’t generate any revenue for the rest of society in the way invention or manufacturing does. Sure living to 85 instead of 80 is good, but it’s not goods. We can’t export it or sell it, and at the end of the day an economy or company that spends huge amounts on overhead is broke.

          Doctors salaries should be brought in line with other similarly educated government workers like judges or DAs which means a comfortable living of 100k or so, but not an extravagant 500k living many specialists make. That of the top 14 best paid jobs in the US a majority are types of medical specialties and the only one from business is CEO, there’s a problem. We need more creating things and less overhead.

          Really the basic problem with healthcare isn’t the Insurance Companies, Obamacare or any of the rest of it. Frankly it’s that specialist doctors make many hundreds of thousands of dollars (even hundreds of thousands more then doctors in the rest of the first world) without actually producing any economic value.

          If the United States was a country medical care would be part of “overhead” in that it does provide a benefit but doesn’t generate any revenue for the rest of society in the way invention or manufacturing does. Sure living to 85 instead of 80 is good, but it’s not goods. We can’t export it or sell it, and at the end of the day an economy or company that spends huge amounts on overhead is broke.

          Doctors salaries should be brought in line with other similarly educated government workers like judges or DAs which means a comfortable living of 100k or so, but not an extravagant 500k living many specialists make. That of the top 14 best paid jobs in the US a majority are types of medical specialties and the only one from business is CEO, there’s a problem. We need more creating things and less overhead.

          It isn’t about Obamacare, it’s about cost controls. The most effective one, frankly, would be making hospitals a municipal utility controlled at the local level like the police and fire department with a similar hierarchy (mayor appointed medical commissioner) and a similar wage scale (where doctors top out in the 150k range). They could be paid for through a combination of local, state and federal taxes with an emphasis on the local (just like police departments) and, again like the police, people could use them on an as needed basis without worrying about back breaking medical fees or any sort of red tape. The idea that a basic municipal service that is life or death should be a business enterprise charging whatever it wants is frankly foolish. Can you imagine having to come up with 10k or provide insurance to the police if you call while you’re being robbed or your son was murdered? Why then, do we accept that with doctors?

  245. Numbers are a funny thing, if you look at the numbers by each group.
    1% is 20% of total earnings and pays 38% of the taxes(as stated above)(Effective Tax=23.3%)
    2-5% is 14.7% of total earning and pays 20.7% of the total taxes. (ET=17.2%)
    6-10% is 11% of total earnings and pays 11.2% of the total taxes.(ET=12.4%)
    11-25% is 21.6% of earnings and pays 16.4% of the total taxes. (ET=9.3%)
    26-50% is 19.9% and pays 11.0% of the total taxes. (ET=6.7%)
    51-100% is 12.8% and pays 2.7% of the total taxes. (ET=2.6%)
    So really the only groups that pay more in taxes relative to total earnings are the top 5%. Instead of just making the bottom 50% pay there “Share” it really should be the bottom 89%.
    So to make everyone pay their fair share (aka flat tax) the tax would need to be 12.4% and taxes would need to be raised on the bottom 89% and for the best part of all this the top 5% get a tax break. I wonder why the leaders of the republican party like the idea of a flat tax? What is even better is that they have convinced middle income republicans that this is a good idea while it in fact it will screw themselves over with a tax increase.

    1. Thats the beauty of being fair. AT least the bottom feeders will actually pay in instead of sucking…sucking..sucking

    2. Its the people that make 33-60k that suffer the most as they appear to be in that area that gets kicked all the time. I am for helping that group and everyone else pay their fair share

  246. Note that the top 1% makes 20% of the income, so paying 39% of the income taxes does not look as disproportionate as you suggest. Also, the bottom earners still pay a lot of state and local taxes, so their overall share of the total tax burden is far higher than zero. Nonetheless, being in the top 1% myself, I do not feel very rich, and I feel that the tax bite is very high. We need to get tough on entitlements, which are going to bankrupt our country unless our leaders can take the brave actions that are needed, like Chris Christie did in NJ. We need to overhaul the tax code and probably should be taxing energy consumption more and income less so as to encourage employment while reducing our overall consumption of energy and hence our need to import oil from hostile countries. Higher gas prices would be tough on small businesses, so maybe there needs to be a subsidy to switch to cheaper natgas for trucks.

    1. If you want someone to blame for your high effective rate of taxation (which isn’t really that high internationally) it is less “welfare queens” and more a system in which actually working for a living is disincentivised. You’re right about the bite of taxes if you’re a high wage worker (say lawyer, doctor, CFO at a small company). You’re easy to track so you’ll probably be paying close to 30% in income tax, 6% in payroll tax, 8% in state tax, 1-2% in unemployment fund taxes plus sales tax, fees and all the rest. Heaven help you if you’re a small business owner earning a few hundred k and eat self employment taxes too, it’s not hard to go above 50% of earned income if you’re a hard working small business owner in the 130k+ range.

      On the other hand you have rich people who are not high wage workers. Who didn’t who spent decades of blood, sweat and tears getting either themselves or their small business into a position to have the enviable problem of a 400k paycheck. They are the “investor” class who pay 15% on most of their income since buying and selling stock and letting everyone else do the real work in society is somehow privileged over doing the actual work that makes that stock rise. Not only is there a much lower income tax, but of course payroll taxes, unemployment taxes and all the rest fall away too. This isn’t even getting into tax dodges like “like kind” exchanges which can let you buy and sell investments with literally 0 tax liability year to year or carrying forward losses to offset taxes on gains.

      I saw Warren Buffet and Bill Gates talk and Buffet mentioned that, with his investments and portfolio he could literally defer any and all taxes until after he died (he said he wouldn’t for moral reasons, but a lot aren’t as moral as buffet up in the stratosphere). The world’s richest man (at the time) could literally pay nothing in taxes for a decade or more in our current system while a manhattan lawyer who grinded it out for 20 years of school and 10 years of 80 hour weeks eats a 50% effective rate.

      That’s where HENRY (high earnings not rich yet) comes from, the teeming masses of strivers who do actually pay a lot of taxes. The almost rich who subsidize the super rich investor class. Honestly noone should be out more forcefully against the wall street plutocracy then the high income worker since nobody gets screwed over more in favor of Wall Street types then them.

  247. $7.35 x 8hr day = $58.8/day
    $58.8/day x 20 days (approx work days in a month) = $1176/month

    Not bad for working a minimum wage full time job with your weekends off.

    If you got a raise to $10… $1600/month.

    1. The top 25.

      It’s not bad if you are a teenager. It’s horrible if you are out of work because you plant closed and they are the only ones hiring.

    2. Do you want to move out of your mommies house???? By the sound of it you don’t. You can’t afford to move out making that much money

    3. Don’t forget, the government needs their 20%, take away $235 of that $1176, or $320 of that $1600….That’s a lot of money when you’re thinking about budgeting necessities. Also don’t forget that most states require an income tax of their own….and then there’s also sales tax in most states….then add on taxes for gas or other commodities the states decide to add on tax for…..

    4. zeus omally

      Andrew,
      First of all, you may be forgetting that many people who make minimum wage don’t work 40 hours a week. In fact, many companies do everything they can to ensure their minimum-wage employees don’t ever work 40 hours ’cause it is one of the conditions for an employee to receive retirement and health benefits.
      Secondly, @1176 a month a person can barely afford to feed themselves. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to earn $1176 a month and still be able to pay for gas, transportation, healthy food, rent, utilities, phone etc and still have any money left over to enjoy much of anything in life. I know people who make this kind of money, and I am not saying that I feel bad for them in all cases, but I certainly don’t begrudge them anything at those kind of wages.

      1. I agree entirely. $1176/month is a tough way to live once you include taxes and prices of gas, rent, healthy food, etc. And, if your employer doesn’t allow for 40 hours, one would have to work less hours than that. Most folks who are in that situation are likely to take on other job and work weekends to make ends meet. But, wouldn’t that be an incentive to try to get that higher wage? Or, work extra hard to maybe get promoted or find different employment? I understand there are always limiting factors, but I think in many instances there is the opportunity to get out of those circumstances.

        1. The thing about being low wage-employed, especially doubly or triply so, is that you neither have the luxury of time, or funds to make a concerted effort to search. In most every application, you are asked to consent to having your current employer contacted. In most low wage situations, if it is suspected you are looking elsewhere, you are simply let go. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, any laps, for any reason, is instantly disastrous. This is, as stated, if you should even have the time and energy to make the kind of concerted effort required to land a job. You must also consider that, for family structures, time away from employment is precious, and we shouldn’t be asking mothers and fathers to make strangers of themselves for the sake of financial survival.

  248. Mike Raymond

    @Phil
    So the guy that makes my hamburger should be able to afford the same things as the guy that designs the surgical equipment needed for heart transplants? People need to live within their means, If you want nicer things then go get a education and get a job that you are qualified for and you can have those same things, until then be thankful that you live in a country that allows you to have those choices. If someone wants to be a burger flipper then they need to know that they will have to live the lifestyle of a burger flipper!

    1. Who said mcdonalds workers need to be paid the same as engineers? Nobody; you increase taxes using a progressive tax system, lets say start at $30,000/year with a 4% tax, and gradually increase by 0.1% for every $1000 more you make annually; that burger flipper still won’t bring home net anywhere near what that $250k+/year engineer brings home net. (with that math, the engineer pays an effective 26% tax, and thus brings home $185k that year net. Obviously you’d either cap the percentage at some point, or slow the increase from every $1000 to every $10k or $20k so the progressive system doesn’t get out of hand, but that would be a much more fair way of keeping revenue flowing for the IRS without imbalancing personal income. Then take away all credits, deductions, etc. Income = all money you make, no matter the source or where you live; if the money is made in the US, it is taxed. period.

      1. All of us working hard 50 to 60 hours a week to have a good life should give up and take a 35 hour a week job, RIGHT? We will all stop paying taxes like the 47%. Then nobody will be paying taxes. Then we are all equal. No more government handouts. Just think how the country will be then. I can spend more time on the couch playing video games. I kind of like that idea. I’m getting tired of idiots (aka Democrats) telling me they want more of my money to give to those that aren’t interested in earning their way through life.

  249. What this break down misses is the other type of taxation, corporate taxation.

    By that I don’t mean the taxation of corporations, what I mean is that everyone who works for a company, even a small one, gives up a significant portion of their earnings to kick it up the chain to the salary of their superiors. Examples of this are all around from the paralegal that bills out at $200 per hour but takes home more like $20 per hour in salary to the sales person who generates $1000 in margin per day but takes home more like $100.

    Sure some of that money goes to overhead, but a lot of it also goes to padding the paychecks of the very rich. For example at a big law firm partners often make several million in profit, most of which is derived not from their hours, but from taking a 50-80% cut of the after overhead earnings of those below them in the chain. Does anyone really believe billionaires made their billions alone? Would Bill Gates be a billionaire without the millions of employees Microsoft has had over the years making all the products they sell? Would the partner at the law firm be making millions if not for taking 80% of what associates and paralegals bill out?

    Nobody is rich in a vacuum, the very rich are very rich because they take value out of the paychecks of the middle class. With many CEOs making 360 times the salary of the average worker at their companies (the ones actually generating and selling the products) there is a lot of informal corporate taxation going on in the other direction. This isn’t to say everyone should make the same, but it’s certainly not unreasonable that those who take income from multiple workers below them pay a higher percentage of that income back in taxes which go to services which benefit everyone.

    1. Edward, the answer is simple, if you do not want to work for that person, then don’t. Simply start your own business and you can keep all the profits you make. Every one in this country has basically the same opportunity to start a business the same as anyone else. I started a business at aged 20, and worked at it for 37 years, and ofter in the first 10 years i thought i might not make it. but long hours and hard work finally paid off and I was able to make a profit There were many years that i made less than my friends were making working in factories.There was one year where I actually lost money and did not earn a penny. Finally I stayed at it long enough to really make good money in the past 10 years. Most people will not be successful, and not because they are not smart enough or willing to work hard enough,(you will work twice as hard when the profit is yours) they will not be successful because they will not take the first step.

      1. Exactly Rick,
        The employee bares no risk, therefore his reward is less. I cannot expect to buy a stock with no risk potential and expect to triple my money. Employees cannot expect to bear no risk but make what the risk bearer makes.

    2. Wow very nicely said. Edward. I’m not upset with anyone in the top 1% if they earned it. It’s the CEO’s who take bailout money because they are incompitant or lazy. They feel entitled because their daddy or grandaddy worked hard, or they knew someone. It’s often not what you know but who you know. It’s these greedy, ruthless bastards that break the law and get away with it. Those are the entitled ones. Just what the hell does “to big to fail” mean. Russia was to big to fail, but fail it did and now Russia and the world is a better place.

  250. It’s not an entitlement attitude, just because someone doesn’t want to work 2, 3, 4 jobs to make a “comfortable” living situation. Though Mcdonald’s pays $10 an hour in San Fran., that doesn’t mean that is what they pay everywhere. It’s people like you who sound like they think they are entitled, people who feel that because they had the fortunate opportunities to make over a certain amount per year that it’s just as easy for anybody else to do, and for that reason snub their noses at people who are voicing their opinions in how unfair the entire system is.

    1. Someone needs to look up the definition of entitlement. If you feel you deserve to have people give you something because you “don’t want to work”, that is an entitlement attitude.

      1. I would suggest that you look up the definition, as it doesn’t only pertain to
        those who “don’t want to work”, but would fit Christy’s example just as well,
        of course. I think you’ve been binging conservative talking-points for so long
        that you’ve forgotten that the word “entitled” does not equal “poor and lazy”.

        1. Chrisy said: “It’s not an entitlement attitude, just because someone doesn’t want to work 2, 3, 4 jobs to make a “comfortable” living situation.”

          Thats exactly an entitlement attitude. If your not skilled, and make a meager hourly rate, and are not willing to work 2-3 jobs to make it-THATS entitlement mentality.

          Entitlement means you feel you shouldn’t have to do certain things- like work 2 jobs, or overtime.

          It means feeling that you deserve to make X amount of dollars no matter what, even at the expense of someone else.

          Someone else WHO IS working overtime, or 2 jobs, or who has their life savings invested in a business.

    2. “It’s not an entitlement attitude, just because someone doesn’t want to work 2, 3, 4 jobs to make a “comfortable” living situation.”

      It’s people like you who sound like they think they are entitled, people who feel that because they had the fortunate opportunities to make over a certain amount per year that it’s just as EASY for anybody else to do,”

      “and for that reason snub their noses at people who are voicing their opinions in how UNFAIR the entire system is.”

      If your job ain’t cutting it to pay your bills, and your not willing to work 2 or 3 jobs, THAT IS an entitlement mentality.

      NOBODY said life was EASY. Working 2 or 3 jobs ISN’T easy. Working 2-3 jobs isn’t a fortunate opportunity. Its called hard work. Its called determination.

      You mention UNFAIR. UNFAIR is expecting those who work 60-80 hours a week, to help support those unwilling to work 60-80 hrs.

      UNFAIR is expecting someone who worked hard AND got an education while also working hard, to help support someone who didn’t go out and get an education to better themselves.

      UNFAIR is calling someone who works hard LUCKY.

      There are 2 sayings in life that are very true.

      The harder you work, the luckier you get.
      and
      Lifes hard. Its even harder if you’re stupid.

      In your view, somebody who works 2-3 jobs or 60-80 hours a week, and some how “makes it” is lucky. Luck is nothing more than preparation meeting opportunity.

      Someone who hasn’t prepared themselves won’t be able to take advantage of opportunity even if it should arise.

      Most of the time, those who were able to take advantage of opportunity when it “came along” were the ones who put themselves in front of opportunity in the first place.

      A surgeon didn’t just one day wake up with a doctors degree and making $350K a year.
      He worked his butt off for 4 years in high school to get good grades to get into a good college.

      He then worked his butt off for 4 years in college to get into a good med school.

      He then worked 4 years in med school so that he could go on to school to become a specialist.

      He then spent 2 more years studying to be a specialist.

      He then spent 4 years as an intern getting the worst shifts and the worst cases. All for little pay.

      While he went to college and med school, you were working a job earning money, while he had to study.

      His 10 year education cost $40k a year, or $400,000.

      14 years of med school and internship and $400,000 in school bills. And he’s “LUCKY”

      Tell him how “lucky” he is when he’s prepping for surgery at 5 am.
      Tell him how “lucky” he is when he’s doing his 6th surgery at 9 pm the same day.
      Tell him how “lucky” he is when he’s doing follow up visits on all his patients before he goes into his office for the day, or after he’s been in the office for the day.
      Tell him how “lucky” he is, when after he finally eats dinner, he reads medical journals to keep up on the latest break throughs or procedures.

      The only thing lucky for him, is if you walk into his office, and don’t try to sue him for malpractice.

  251. Some ones math is wrong. You say you worked at McDonald’s for $3.50/hour now wages are 3 times that? or $10.50/hr. last time I checked the fed mim wage is $7.35/hr. at $3.50/hr you had to work 40 hrs. to earn $550/month. Now you suggest a second job? That’s 80/hr weeks. 16 hr days 5 days a week. no thank you. Do you work that? There is no defense. The top 1% needs to pay their fair share.

      1. By your logic, and the ‘flat tax’, you would allow someone who makes only $20,000 per year to pay $4000 of that to taxes, making a net of $16,000 (That’s a 40-hour job at $9.62/hour); which, if you live in low-income housing in Iowa, where I live, costs you $350/month roughly. just to have a roof over your head, it costs $4200/year. Food costs for a single mother (would could easily be in this situation) would be around $200/month buying the cheapest food possible at a grocery store – another $2400 annually. This mother now has $9600 left for the year ($800/month) to pay for gas to get to work (or maybe a bus which isn’t free), electricity, water, health insurance (which is usually about $300-400/month per person for bare minimum coverage), a telephone, and entertainment/toys/clothes for herself and her child. By your logic here, she isn’t taking a SINGLE entitlement aside from low income housing, which in some areas is like living in a sewer, and WILL NOT GET BY. Sure, she could take a second job, and never see her child. We haven’t even started talking about daycare costs, which are typically between $2.50-5/hour. She wouldn’t have time to go to school to better herself…..you think this person deserves this hardship only because her $9.62/hour job doesn’t pay better, or that she’s not educated enough? She doesn’t have a chance. She’s in America, and doesn’t have a chance if she lives by your conservative anti-entitlement logic. THIS is why the rich pay more. that $4000 means nothing to someone who makes that in a day or less. It means a better LIFE to this single mother…..so does the food stamps that give her a leg up, the medicaid options for her and her child so that if mommy gets sick, life doesn’t end. It means social security so that this mom, who had NO extra money to save for retirement, can at least have a place to stay and food to eat when her body won’t let her work any longer. It means the chance at an education to better herself, and an education for her child. Get off your high horse and see that the money paid by the top earners allows others to have a chance to fill their shoes someday….

        1. Mike Raymond

          So she made the decision to have a child and now it is my fault and Responsibility to make sure she and her child is taken care of? My wife and I made sure that we were financially secure before we decided to have children. It all comes down to being responsible. I feel bad for the children who’s parents decided not to look out for their children before they decided to bring them into this world, It’s not their fault their parents are irresponsible. Things happen in life and there should be plans for those people but those plans shouldnt be a lifestyle they should be their to help them get back on their feet.

          EX-Kids on meal plans at scholl and at home they have flat screen tv’s game counsels, and some even have cell phones. Seems lke a waste of money to me, but the parents have made the most of their free lifestyle that they feel entitled to.

        2. I assume you mean this study

          You’re quoting 18%, 29%, and 54.9% (which by the way, a cell phone when paid month by month on a low-end plan is as affordable or cheaper than a land line) respectively. We’re not talking living in the lap of luxury here, but I see your point, if you’re poor, you should be POOR, like homeless on the street or something right? Sure, the entitlement income guidelines need to be adjusted for qualification for things like welfare, food stamps, etc. I can agree with that. I also believe there need to be stricter time limits for being on these programs; to prevent an ‘entitled’ attitude that people should rely on the government entirely. However, I don’t think cutting these programs as a whole is beneficial. I noted in a post below about a progressive tax system I feel would be fair to all, and would bring in more revenue but wouldn’t allow 50% of the country to not pay any taxes at all. The mindset of ‘punishing the successful’ seems ludicrous to me. They are paying a larger percentage, but still bring home their ‘successfully deserved’ larger share of money annually than their middle and lower class counterparts. You still work harder, you still make more money, and the share of it is minutely more than those who make a little less than you; in short, if you get a raise, you will notice that raise on your paycheck and in your wallet. With success also comes the responsibility to ensure those who have given you your success (which in America means the middle class buying your products, services, or whatever; being our economy is 80% based on spending anyway), those people are provided for so they can continue to buy your products, services, or whatever….and so the economy turns.

        3. zeus omally

          Mike Raymond,
          Noone said it was your fault that the woman had a child, but I think you may want to consider the costs to society if that child is not taken care of. Lots of poor people abuse the system, but don’t forget that many poor people are abused BY the system as well, so the solution is to look for constructive ways to make a system(economic, social)in which more people, and their children, can become productive citizens. Many countries are more successful at this than we are and most of them have more equitable income distribution than we do in this country. We all know that the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer is not a recipe for success, yet we also know that is exactly what has been happening in this country for the last 30-years. So instead of listening to the financial samurai and other conservatives in this country whine about how unfair taxes are to them, perhaps you should think about constructive things we could do to fix our broken economic system—and believe me, giving the wealthy lower taxes is not the solution, despite what many of them claim!

        4. robert makrham

          Wow good job on changing subjects attack the issue. If i worked my whole life a a certified welder making more money then both of my parents combined per year, but tell you i am one of the highest paid in my are what % would you think I am in? I am in the bottom 50% and you know who much overtime i would work to try and get by , as much as i was able to. So i should never have children because i am poor? Why am I poor because i do not work hard , I am unlucky or what? Well i know thousands of people that work hard but will never get out of this bottom have of the system.

        5. I am sorry to say but everyone has to take responsiblities for their own actions and destiny. I could have mounted to more in life then I did but I made some poor decisions. The same goes for everyone else ! The example mentioned earlier about the single mother,
          well wheres the father? If she was not married where was the birth control? If she was married wheres the child support from the father. It’s not fair for the tax payers to be paying for your bad judgement. You have to live with in your means or move to an area in the country that will allow you to obtain the life style you want. Nobody owes you anything and you should not expect the tax payer to pic up your short falls. I work hard for my family and I have to work even harder and see my family less because I have to support you too!
          Respectfully,
          Edgar Allen Poe

        6. This is why liberals are so pathetic. You think that because somebody does well in school and spends the first half of their life working hard and/or saving their money, that they should give it to low class losers who smoked weed and partied through their junior high and high school years. I don’t feel sorry for anybody that is poor. That woman who has a child probably had the kid outside of marriage and was all cracked out when she got pregnant and now you think that everyone should feel bad for her. I know people who came from nothing. They were handed the worst possible hand and still managed to be incredibly successful. I’m not saying all of homeless people. But most homeless people are on the streets because they are lazy or using drugs and alcohol. The rest are mentally ill and need help. I think that democrats think that being average is okay. What ever happened to being the best? Democrats think that they are being robin hood, but nobody is deprived of anything in the united states. Whatever you become is what you deserve. I can’t stand anyone telling me how I should spend my money that I successfully earned. All of you democrats need to go get a job or stop listening to your hippie college professors and make your own decisions.

        7. La Conservative Latina

          Why is that every single mom senario is her making minimum or close to minimum wage?? She is viewed as a victim and is SOL? That is only the case if that’s where she wants to be. If a woman does become pregnant and keeps her child, then she better step up to the plate and do anything possible to make a better life for her child and be a good example for her child. It kills me when some feel that they are entitled and must be given a hand. That attitude becomes a long legacy of generational hand-outs. It’s an attitude where responsibility and accountability is taken away from them. Frankly, it’s BS an not an environment or an opportunity to be responsible for their own destiny.

          Why does it piss me off so much? I grew up in a very poor neighborhood. I witnessed the fraud. I was there and saw it with my own eyes. I was that young single mom making very little money. I decided to do it on my own without handouts. I lived in a converted one-car garage with no heat and no air con. During the rainy season, the walls would be moist they looked as if they were sweating. I lived in those conditions for 5.5 years while I was putting myself through college, and working full-time.

          I was at the bottom fifty percent at that time, but I believed in me. I wanted to get out of being in that situation and I did it without sticking my hand out and I take pride in that. I will never forget where I came from and neither will my child. It was rough, but we did it!!

          I came out of that situation and my child is now a college graduate herself. I am now married and have two more kids. I am now (according to this article) well within the five percent – more accurately within the two to three percent range.

          Taking in to consideration what I went through and because I was ambitious enough to pull myself out, I’m completely insulted that I’m now being penalize for doing what I instinctually felt was best for my child and me.

          I’m being punished because I refused hand-outs when I initially qualified for them. Ironic indeed!! Why did I refuse them? I was and am conservative. Yes, a Republican Hispanic single mother amongst Libs taking hand-outs.

          1. Thanks for sharing your story! It is interesting how it’s always the single mother story too, oh, and with a handicap of course. One of my good friends is a singe mother too, who made it work and is now CEO of a great non profit. I was amazed, but always knew she would keep fighting without the deadbeat father and do something. I’m so impressed with her. She is a Liberal and loves Obama btw.

            This article isn’t about being a liberal or conservative actually. It’ just about everybody contributing to society and giving back more than we get. My what a great scenario we’d be in if this were the case. I’m glad you made it out and have found a way to improve your situation for you and your family!

      2. San Fransisco is also a rather expensive place to live. I think you’d find the standard of living for the San Fran Mc’Donald’s employee is just as tight, even with that supposed 10/hour, as his midwestern 7/hour counterparts.

        1. Bingo. At $10/hour, it may be very well more tight than someone earning $7/hr in Des Moines. I was scratching my head when folks assailed me for saying we can make $10/hour at McDonald’s here! Houses cost $700,000 on average folks.

      3. Jessica Skorupski

        Well “Financial Samurai” I can see that you are not an objective source of information – thanks for showing your cards.

      4. People (in general) are not asking for handouts. They are just asking for the ability to live a good life. If you work 80hr/wk, you are essentially working and sleeping. Is that really the type of life anyone wants to lead? Should we desire to live that life? If we (as a population) learned a little bit about satisfaction, about being satisfied with a comfortable life, then the wealth would naturally spread.

        Instead, we have to be constantly taking advantage of others to get ahead, grinding employees into the ground, squeezing every last bit of productivity out of them until they have little energy to do anything else with their life. Some people find their jobs enjoyable and that’s great. But a lot of people are not satisfied with their professional because what they’re passionate about is not a viable career option, and that’s a reality we must live in, but shouldn’t people have some time in their lives to enjoy their life? Or should we all just submit as slaves to the capitalist system, grinding away at 80hr/wk until we die while making other people wealth enough that they don’t have to work?

        1. 80hrs a week for an extended period of time is tough. However, if folks in America ad overseas are at least working 50-60 hrs a week to get a head, it’s up to you whether you fall forward or behind. It’s called Accepting Reality.

          40 hrs a week is pretty puny if one wants to get ahead.

    1. I love it when a lib say “Fair Share” The top ten percent of wage earners pay 73 percent of all Fed Income tax. If you want fair….. Make it 15 percent for all. that includes the 51 percent that pay no Fed tax. Now that would be fair. If you are not for taxing all equally then quit using the term “Fair Share”. You obviously dont know what it means.

        1. But of course the liberals all cite the same, exact, scientifically correct studies when opining on how much the wealthy SHOULD pay in taxes?

      1. Importantly that is 73% of INCOME taxes, not taxes in general. A lot of conservatives make it seem like anyone who isn’t driving a BMW doesn’t pay any taxes at all which is ridiculousIn fact there are a lot of other taxes as I’m sure conservatives know (and then ignore). Many of these taxes are regressive instead of progressive so taxes aren’t as lopsided as one would think.

        In reality if you take TOTAL taxes which includes sales tax (regressive), excise taxes on gas, liquor and cigarettes (regressive), payroll taxes (regressive in that after just over 100k you don’t have to pay Social Security anymore which is a huge savings for the rich), sales tax (regressive in that the poor and middle class spend FAR more of their income period, particularly far more of their income locally), state taxes (often far more regressive then fed tax), unemployment taxes, and of course misc fees and fines (regressive in that they don’t account for income at all and are more likely to be paid by the poor who can’t fight them). Property related taxes are regressive too in that the tax savings are far less at a lower marginal rate and property (and thus property taxes) end up being a much bigger portion of household net worth for the poor and middle class.

        All said that oft quoted 21% of income and 40% of income taxes figure for the top 1% ends up heading down to just about 21% of income and 21% of TOTAL taxes. The taxes paid by the poor after taking into account all the sources of taxation goes from 0% in theory to more like 15-20% in reality. In fact one of the reasons for the EITC is to offset all the taxes poor people DO pay at a much higher rate then the rich.

        1. This website is laughable

          I absolutely LOVE how there’s no reply to this post… Come on financial samurai, say something witty… Or is the logic too much for your conservative views?…. And to your post below please read her whole comment she said that her family makes between 40-50 thousand a year, which you yourself quoted as having an effective tax rate of about 12%… So don’t try to discredit her by saying she’s not poor… Besides the Occupy movement is against the top 1%, which she is clearly not in, no matter what her tax rate is… Get off your high horse and actually listen to what’s going on around you, because if you think you’re gonna win a fight against the 99%, you’re truly as delusional as this article suggests you are… Oh btw I too live in the bay area, I’m not poor but I’m not rich either, but I AM reasonable enough to know that our country need fundamental change…. Oh and wtf is this talk about working more than 40 hours a week? If you have one full time job, you can’t just choose to work overtime to get more hours, you need to clear it with management, who obviously won’t approve it… That means you need a second job… Ya like its so damn easy to get a 2nd job with 9% of Americans (even higher in ca) who can’t even find ONE?! Bahahaha give me a break

          1. What’s the comment? I can’t keep track b/c there are now close to 700.

            If you have an effective federal tax rate of 22%, there’s no way in hell you are only making 40-50K a year. Perhaps if she is adding in state and every other taxes.

            Do you really have no skills to be able to get second job and market yourself online eg Craigslist? If not, then there’s no helping you.

        2. Would Love to pay ONLY my fair share

          Wait, don’t the top earners pay sales, liquor, gas, and all the other taxes too? Presumably making more means spending more and paying more of those taxes then the bottom 50%.

        3. The top percent still would pay the seventy some odd percent sales tax you idiot. You think that the top income earners don’t spend their money. They spend more that the lower percentile so that would make the amount of taxes paid even more. If I make a thousand a week and you make ten, and we both pay ten percent income tax. I paid 100 dollars and you paid one. you only have nine dollars left. I still have 900. I would spend probably another three hundred and pay sales tax on that money spent and you would spend the rest of your money because you don’t know how to manage it. I still paid around 25 dollars more sales tax and you paid 9 cents. I think your analogy came from another retarded liberal university.

      2. robert makrham

        See what the government is trying to do is make life livable for every one by taking away from the money people have beyond bills. the bottom 50 percent has very little free money to play with but it appears the top has alot or room to play with. If i made 35000 per year my share at 15% would be 5250 which means i would bring home 29750. lets say some one made 1 million 15 percent of that would be 150 thousand so they pay the same percent but how much room do they have to play with? How much spending money do they have with 850000 left over?

        1. Your right … everyone should be equal and no body should make more than someone else .. even if they spent 10 years studying and 200k in college. They should be penalized and taxed higher so those who want to do nothing can laugh at them…lololololol

        2. wow… financial samurai… I’m a little disgusted. I am married, and I have one child. I work 40 hours, my husband works 50 hours. We work 2 different shifts so that we don’t have to pay for child care. I am careful with our money. We pay 23% in taxes. I dont know how you came to the conclusion that the poor only pay 2.7% but you are mistaken. Taxes are important. They pay for roads, education… If I could afford to pay 150,000 in taxes, I would be happy to do so. Unfortunately, we only make about 40-50 thousand a year. I feel like everyone should pay the same percentage out of their checks. If I made more money and they took more in taxes, that would be fine b/c at the end of the day, I’m still walking home with more money in my pocket.

          1. Are you poor? I’m assuming you are not with you and your husband working. What is your household income?

            The statistics come straight from the IRS.

            If you pay a 22% effective tax rate, you are NOT poor.

        3. living the dream in swfl

          so why does it matter how much income a person makes I think we should all be paying taxes hard should be close in the same percent. So for me I am 27, married, with 2 kids and rough income is 130k a year after bonus and stock options. S far ytd I have paid 35k in taxes do to paying higher tax based on bonus percents. I have never had issues paying my taxes or even complained about paying my fair share of taxes. I don’t agree with the bottom 50 percent paying almost no taxes. I was not given any silver spoon and grew up in a working family but was able to go to a local community college and worked 2 jobs to get through school to be able to have an increased income. A lot of people also forget individuals like me do make more, pay more in taxes but many of us also have school loans to pay off which we never calculate into the equations. I am just tired of heating people complain they work hard and don’t make above the bottom 50 percent. Its not about working hard but more about how do you excel in a company to grow in the company and take risks. Does everyone think anyone who is in the top 10 percent didn’t take a risk in their careers at one point to get where they are. For instance the welder with the comment above. If you are working for a company that does welding have you ever taking a risk to be the best at everything from training others to networking inside the company to get promotions. Or better yet since it is nitch role have you thought about taking a risk and opening your own company. People its about leveraging your abilities to make people trust you which will give you more financial income I’ll pay my taxes at what ever rates but lets get serious and everyone needs to be paying some kind of fair rates and stop relying on government hand me outs.

    2. @Mike Raymond
      Is *IS* your fault if you support taking away womens rights to choose abortion.

      The Neocons don’t want social systems or tax breaks for the poor or single mothers, but they sure are in a hurry for that baby to be born into poverty. besides some abortions are medically needed.

      Every Pro-Life nut job should be required to take on a child, with no choice of sex, race or medical condition and not get a DIME for support. They must bring up the child to adult.

      See how many of them will scurry away.

      1. First of all, it’s still wouldn’t be his fault. Since when does an adult not have the free choice to abstain from sex in the first place or to take contraceptives. If you choose to have sex, then you choose to live with the responsibility of what that entails. If you don’t know that sex could lead to having a baby then you shouldn’t have the mental capacity to have sex in the first place. The men that have 6 kids by different mothers, they know where babies come from. The women who have 6 illegitimate kids by different fathers, they know where babies come from as well. Those people choose to have sex and they choose to have the chance of having a baby. Nobody should be able to choose to murder the child that they chose to have sex to create. A baby is a baby no matter how old it is in the womb. A human baby does not become an elephant while in utero, it is and always will be a human baby. If you had a family member in a coma who was legally dead and were told that there was a 100% chance they would be completely back to normal by 9 months from now, would it be murder to pull the plug. I think it would be. People still need to take responsibility for the choices they make.

        1. In a coma you can’t be legally dead. Brain Death (death of the Brain Stem) is what legally constitutes death. There is NO recovery from brain death. When people are in a persistent vegetative state they are not brain dead and people who are brought back after their heart has stopped NEVER had a dead brain stem at any point. How can you call abortion murder before 7 weeks, which is when the brain stem is formed. If you do not have a living brain stem, you are not alive. You are calling a clump of cells a human life – which it scientifically is not. Do not propagate lies to further your opinion. It is people like you why nobody takes anything professionals take seriously.

        2. So according to your logic–I am a fertile woman going around and living her day to day life and I get forcefully raped and impregnated. Just because I am walking around with the equipment to make a baby that I am obligated carry it to term even though it may remind me of the rape every single day it continues to grow in my body. What if this same woman is married? Are you honestly saying that it is their moral obligation as a couple to have this baby that may ultimately destroy their marriage and happiness?

          What about a child with a deformity? What if I am pregnant with a child that I know will never be able to live independently? Is it morally correct to knowingly give birth to a child that I will not live long enough to care for and will have to rely on the resources of the taxpayer to care for this child long after I’m gone.

          If you don’t like abortion then don’t get one. If a woman wants an abortion, I really don’t care what her reasons are. Let her have it! There is no shortage of people in the world and if you look around you’ll see we are using up resources we can’t replace.

          Legalized Abortion caused the crime rates to plummet.
          Not all parents are equal. I’m sure there are some aborted fetuses that would have grown into successful contributors to society but a pretty high amount would grow up to be pieces of poo in the welfare system that you would complain are a drain on society that you shouldn’t have to pay for.

          Something, I agree with you on you on the first point. Not our responsibility if someone else makes bad decisions. Entitlements have gotten so cushy that there is no incentive to leave the system. If they cover the bare minimum and are spartan–people aren’t going to want to stay on public assistance and will have the incentive to better themselves.

          1. I see and agree with your viewpoint. If this situation occurred, you should have full authority over YOUR body, not some government, or worse yet, some strange guy in power telling you what you can and cannot do!

        3. Thank you for information on brain death. I am not a professional and don’t really claim to be, it was simply a hypothetical. My point is simple, if a baby will become a human being at some point in your theory, then it is a human being at that point. States define life at different points, doctors define life at different points, courts define life at different points, and people all over the planet define when life begins at different points. None of that changes the fact that the baby will, IF GIVEN A CHANCE, become a human life at some point. If you extinguish that, then you are in fact extinguishing a human life. You are not even giving the baby a chance. My wife had an ectopic pregnancy at a few weeks of baby’s life and it was devastating to both her and to me. Human life is not life because we define it at a certain point, it is life because we are giving a completely innocent being a chance at living. You can argue semantics all you want, but if you ask somebody who was told as an adult that they were almost aborted in utero, they will undoubtedly tell you they are glad they were given the chance at life.

        4. Basset, first of all forceful rape wasn’t in the initial argument. If a woman is forcefully raped she didn’t choose to have sex to have the baby, did she? Forcible rapes generally do not create a baby, but I think that’s a different situation altogether. I think a child that has a deformity is a human being in every sense and I think it is morally wrong to kill that child just because they will cost more. I think it’s morally correct in the fact that you can pay for that child until your death and you shouldn’t have to count on society to cover it thereafter. It used to be your family, a private entity, or even a trust you set up would help with the child after your death, so I don’t think that government has to be involved in the care. I don’t think we should judge the worth of a child like that and besides any child can become deformed or mentally handicapped at or after birth and we don’t just kill them off because they would be an inconvenience.

          If a baby doesn’t want to be aborted, it doesn’t get a chance to say that it doesn’t. If a woman wants to have an abortion I don’t really care what her reasons are. Let the baby have a chance at life! There may be too many people in the world, but we don’t just go causing genocides because of that. I think if a there’s a showing that a woman can’t support a number of children and is still actively having children and not really wanting them, that that woman should be sterilized and if a man continues to have sex with women despite not wanting to bear the responsibility of the children he is causing to be born, he should be sterilized. The baby, no matter what stage of life it is in, should not be penalized because the parents don’t want to take responsibility for their actions.

      2. It sounds like you are ok with murder when it supports your agenda. Maybe we could extend abotion rights up to age thiry and if you are not able to pay your fair share of taxes by age thirty you must then be aborted. If we harvest your organs and sell them on the black market we may even be able to make an aditional profit on the abortions of 30 year old non-contributers in America. Viva la choice!

      3. I have a friend that has been waiting for a child to adopt for 4 years now. She SPECIFICALLY requested a minority with special needs because she is a grade school teacher that works with crack kids all day long and actually loves her job. Hmmmm… seems odd that she is still waiting, does it not?

        There are millions of people wanting babies to love and they’re waiting and waiting. I have been smugly asked “would you take that child if it’s not aborted” and I say over and over that I would take 5 of them! The greatest gift God has given us is life.

        My aunt was murdered while she was pregnant. The guy that did it is in prison for the rest of his life on TWO counts of murder 1. How is it that he is in prison for killing 2 people when CLEARLY according to a “pro choice” person he only killed ONE person, as a fetus is not a person until it takes its first breath.

        And I support a woman’s right to choose. She can CHOOSE not to have sex. There are rapes but that is not the fault of the child and again, there are millions of people waiting to love that baby.

        The bottom line is being pregnant is inconvenient if you’re not eager to have a baby. Hell, it’s inconvenient when you ARE eager to have one.

        Our constitution speaks of our posterity. And in case any of you obama lovers (cause he’s a constitutional “scholar”) need a refresher course, posterity means UNBORN generations. What if Steve Jobs biological mother had decided that she’d rather not give birth? Where would you be without your iPhone? What if Tim Tebow’s mom decided her life was more important than the baby? There are plenty of examples of people that could have CHOSEN to abort but didn’t and those babies grew up to be fabulous people.

        For that matter, I notice that NONE of you “pro choice” people bother to know the history of planned parenthood or it’s founder margaret sanger. Look up the NEGRO PROJECT.

        How many playwrites, poets, rock stars, football players, doctors, presidents, welders, … or just how many SMILES have we missed out on in the name of convenience?

      4. you sound like an ignorant piece of **** that loves to blame everyone else for your problems. I had a kid when I was 24 and another when I was 25. Both were unexpected. I don’t even work half of what I’m capable and my company that I started when I was 25 grosses a quarter of a million dollars a year. I think your pathetic and you need to start blaming yourself or your parents. Even in this harsh economy, there is money out there. You just have to stop sitting on your ass collecting your unemployment check and go work for it. Why don’t you pull those work boots out from under your bed. And I don’t want to hear how you work hard every day. I’m in construction and the only way to move ahead is to bust your ass. If your not successful yet. It’s because your a piece of ****.

    3. McDonald’s pays $10/h? oh boy now I can buy that steak dinner I had my eye on. come on get real. So I just need to work at McDonald’s 2,500 hrs a week to get into that top 1%.

    4. I have to say, “financial samurai” is just plain funny. If he really thinks someone making 33k a year can afford to live in a place like San Francisco, let alone afford to pay for moving expenses to get there, than he is not living in the reality that everyone else is in. I grew up in the bay area and now live in Salt Lake City. I make around 50k a year and if I was making that and living in the bay, I would have no savings, for emergencies or retirement at all. In fact, the only way that I have been able to get ahead is mainly due to the fact that my wife makes double what I do.

      And someone making $10 an hour at McDonald’s is making about 20k a year (with no benefits). And even if there were 2 people making that in San Francisco, they would not be able to afford healthcare and they would not be able to afford daycare for their kids. So, say, they both work 2 $10/hr jobs, that would be a household income of 80k or so a year. That is starting to look more like an income that a family could live off of in SF. But that also means that both parents are working 16hr days/80hr weeks. Now I am not saying it is not doable, but that also very little time for anything else other than work (being sick, getting injured, raising kids, or anything else that life may through at you). I have several friends that live in SF and have just started to get ahead financially when they started to make 80k+a year. The way I look at it if one is going to only be able to get a job at a place like McDonald’s they would be better off not moving to a “vibrant location” as you put it, because they may actually be able to save some money or afford to go to a local community college.

      I would love to see all those out there that have the mind set that financial samurai have, start off in some back ass town where the only job you can get is making federal minimum wage and your parents are poor and you have little to no access to any kind of higher education, and see if they could make it out of a situation like that with no outside help.

      I like to think that I have a strong work ethic, but my wife puts me to shame. I also recognize that I am where I am due to a large amount of luck. I am white, born to an upper middle class family. If I was born into a situation like I was I have little doubt I would be living pay check to pay check and struggling to get ahead.

      I also love it when there are people of the attitude that if you are not rich, it is your own fault (Mr Cain). I am sure that there are very few out there who would not want to be rich, but if everyone was rich than who would clean your toilet???

      There are those who have made something out of nothing and gone from poverty to upper middle class or higher, but the fact is those people are very few and far between. For the rest of us where we spend most of our lives (financially) mainly depends on the situation we were dealt.

      1. I never said making 33K and living in SF is easy. I said even someone working at McDonald’s can find a way to make 33K and be in the top 50%.

        Congrats on having yourself a spouse who makes double. Isn’t that nice.

      2. Chris Uffelman

        Everyone can learn a lot from Robert Kiyosaki. Financial Education is key. Want to learnt how to be rich? Take a look who we work for, The Rich. I share opportunities everyday to become an entrepreneur through Life Force Internation. I met a woman in this business who makes around $45,000 a month and the membership is free, so it is possible to become rich and start out with almost nothing.

      3. Im sorry, but if you can’t make it in America, you can’t make it anywhere. I did not come from a wealthy family. I worked minimum wage jobs during highschool. I started buying all my own stuff and paying for my own car at the age of 16. I never received a dime in help from my parents after I turned 18. I barely graduated highschool because I just didnt care. Luckily I realized that I wanted more for myself and now I have put myself and my wife through college, with no student loans. I came from nothing, and now make more than 50% of Americans and my wife has her own part time home business. If we can do it, anyone can do it. All it takes is a little motivation. The government that makes people’s lives easy for them removes the motivation for the person to do it themselves.

        1. Are you white and male? I am not saying that you can not make it as a minority or a women in this country but there are social barriers that have been in place in this country for a long time that people who fall into that category never see. I consider myself lucky to have gotten as far as I have at the moment, and I realize part of it is due to the hard work I have put into my life, but most of it is just plain luck.

          Say you are a young black male or female born into a neighborhood where the poverty rate is sky high and unemployment is double that of white america. For someone in that situation, finding a minimum wage job may be near impossible. And when you are in a situation like that you can not afford to travel far from your neighborhood to find a job that would allow you to travel back and fourth, let alone move out of your neighborhood. Now imagine that you have no father figure in your life (being raised by a single mom working 3 jobs just to put food on the table). That would just make it that much harder to learn things so valued in this country, like a work ethic.

          You may not have received help from your parents before you were 18, but did you have a stable upbringing with 2 parents? If you did, that counts for a lot, and is more than most people can boast who grew up in poverty.

          So, again, I will repeat this incase it was lost. It is not impossible to make it out of poverty in this country, just very hard. So to say that the government takes away motivation just shows me that you never “needed” that help. My wife for instance, grew up in a poor family in southern California. They were on government food subsidy programs, her mom was a stay at home mom, and dad worked very long hours to provide for the family. If they did not have government assistance with the extra food, there would have been times where they would not have eaten. This same thing goes for most kids that are in poverty, and for some, their school lunch (a government subsidized program) would be their only meal for a given day. Just try to learn at school when you have barely eaten all week, I know I can barely concentrate if I skip breakfast…

          When you and your wife go through a bad string of luck and you both get laid off (I pray that never happens to you), and you need that or similar assistance, you may start singing a different tune.

          Most of where we are in life is what we were born into. We have very little control over where we will end up. And again do not take that the wrong way, I still think it is possible to cross the “class” lines, and y wife is a perfect example of that.

          The thing that I find interesting is that we have had this discussion of what is the proper amount of taxed each of us should pay. What is best for the country economically? If you look at past performance as an indicator, which is our only real resource on this, when taxes are higher, the country grows, jobs are created, and guess what? The richest does pretty well, though not as well as they have in the last few years. Every time that taxes have been significantly lowered there has been a slow down in the economy (not recession, just slower growth). And currently our tax rates are the lowest they have been since the 50s, with one exception, when Reagan cut taxes on the absolute richest among us. But when Reagan started seeing the economy, he even raised taxes! That is something you rarely hear conservatives mention.

          Anyway, I must say it again, I do think it is possible to pull yourself up from your own bootstraps in this country, but is has become increasingly harder and harder in the last 10 years. I have friends who graduated with engineering degrees and are still working in bike shops because they can not find jobs using their degree.

          1. Have you ever traveled to the flavelas in brazil or practically anywhere in India? America is like the Four Seasons compared to a many other countries out there.

            I hear what you are saying. Americans just need more perspective.

    5. Chris Uffelman

      Maybe the Rich don’t pay their fair share in taxes and maybe they do. The question is what is their fair share? Here is an Idea, stop worrying whether the rich is paying their fair share and widen the tax base by becoming an entrepreneur and create new entrepeneurs widening the tax base so that taxes may be lowered. How does that sound?

  252. back to jenna and sandra howerton reply:
    GE lost billions in the ’08 melt down. They claimed those losses in subsequent tax years, which is fair and completely legal. [what is repugnant is that the company is getting about 1.5 billion to build yet another wind farm in over-developed California from our wonderful Obama administration when they have about 150 billion in available funds of their own]
    The Harvard study ESTIMATED 45k deaths annually. They didn’t actually name anyone.
    There are many trades people (plumbers, electricians, cabinet makers, etc.) that are not only well off; many of them own their own businesses, employ a lot of other people, and are well within the upper income class.
    Yes, Socialism did start in the U.S. about then; think Woodrow Wilson (or even Teddy Rooseveldt before him).
    If a corporate CEO (who is paid, say, 5 million a year) turned around that company, saved a lot of jobs in the process, and increased it’s earnings by 20 million a year, he has more than earned his pay. That’s why he is a CEO and we aren’t.
    Finally, I didn’t say that rich people are entitled to anything. What ever extras they and their families have was EARNED. This is still America after all,where you are supposed to be able to “pursue happiness” without some self-righteous socialists taking it away because you have ‘too much’ and they don’t.

  253. Firstly, I know a 1% that is disabled from the waist down since birth. He got there by working hard in high school, college, and law school and becoming a partner at a prestigious law firm. Those who are in the bottom 50%, (besides those with a very serious mental or physical handicap,) have the oppurtunity to get an education and earn more income. Why do Mcdonalds employees make so little? Because they are so replacable. Anyone can do that job because it requires NO skill. When you can establish a skill that is needed you will be paid more (it is called supply in demand.) If you don’t like being poor move to a bigger city or go get an education, instead of hating on the wealthy who are needed.

  254. As someone who lives well in the bottom 50%, I can say that if I had to pay any more tax from my paycheck I would probably end up defaulting on my rent. Twenty percent of my annual income goes to the various taxes I have to pay. As a result, I can afford my rent, my bills (which does not include such luxuries like cable), groceries and a little into my savings each month. That’s about it. Things like health insurance and a functional car are beyond what I can afford. Now, I am lucky. I know that much. I can afford an apartment in a safe neighborhood, a savings account and to feed myself and my cat. My paycheck is enough that I can work to pay off my student loans and look proudly at the degree on my wall that proves I am not just some lazy lump who is not willing to work hard to achieve the type of lifestyle she desires. Granted, that degree is not in finance, business or politics. So really I am rather like every other lemming out there who just hates to see so much of their money leaving their pockets when other people can afford to buy a new flat screen TV or a car on a whim.

    Still, I agree should have to pay an equal percentage. It is unfair to ask me to pay less of my hard work than anyone else. Yes, I could probably tighten my belt, move to a different less expensive neighborhood and stop putting money into my savings and still be able to afford all of the necessities in life (again still not including health insurance). However, you have to remember, that those of us down here in the bottom 50% would like to have a little breathing room. If you take a look a lifetstyles… The top 25% tighten a belt to pay the taxes… those of us in the bottom are tightening a corset. They give up things like designer clothes, new cars or going out for lunch at work. We give up things like insurance.

    Just saying my two bits as one of the uneducated lemmings, this is how we see things. Since we do not understand government and finance, we expect the rich to make up what we cannot afford. When people ask us to pay more, we shout about how shitty we have it already and say take it from the guy driving the Lexus. Anyone who has been excited about being able to go to Walmart and afford fresh vegetables probably knows what I mean.

    1. Mari, I thank you for your honest perspective. I agree with much of what you are saying, no doubt about it.

      Frankly, I do not want taxes to be increased on ANYBODY, even the people who aren’t paying any federal taxes. We need smaller government, and we certainly shouldn’t have one group of people decide to raise taxes on another group of people if they aren’t paying more themselves.

  255. Keep in mind that the top 50% utilize the benefits coming from taxes, more than the bottom 50%. Their kids will be going to better schools (though some may elect to pay private schools instead), have better libraries, better access to police, fire departments and hospitals. They will utilize our infrastructure more than poor people, i.e. wear and tear on roads, usage of airports etc. I am sure there are countless other examples as well.

    By all means, take a critical look at the cutoff points for tax, and I also think 30% of your income going to tax should be the max regardless of how much you make, provided all loopholes are closed. (utopian idea of course)

    1. At 28-29 years old, I find it very hard to believe I got over $100,000 worth of benefits from my tax dollars. I take a $65 a month BUS to work for goodness sakes. Where are my phantom kids going to school? Why would a policeman protect me better than any other citizen? Come on, give me a break.

  256. Please stop talking about how kids with poor parents can’t get anywhere in life. I know a man who was raised by his blind mother. His eduacation and free ticket to being in the top 50% was not handed to him, but now he is 23 and makes 125,000+ a year! If your parent(s) didnt finih high school doesn’t mean you’re not going to be able to either. Even if you don’t want to get a job during college there are still thousands of scholarships to help you pay. I know at least 4 people who fit this scenario exactly.

    Another point is that the top five percent not only pay more taxes but they pay the lower class. They hire people to cut their lawn instead of doing themselves. Just by hiring other lower class citizens they not only provide more jobs but they spend lots of their money paying these people and helping the economy. I do understand you can’t tax the bottom 25% $80,000 a year but I still feel that with all the top 5% does for the economy that they shouldn’t be made to pay 40% of their income in taxes

  257. @David Scott

    Honestly, I dont think people bust their but everyday and at times succeed in making more money do it so that they can “help out their fellow man”. You work hard so YOU can have a better living for YOURSELF and family. Now..yeah we may give to charities etc, or churches, but heck..

  258. @David Scott

    Dude… in Topeka, KS, McDonald’s is starting at $9.25/hr. If you want your wages to rise, send immigrations through checking IDs. That is always good at our companies here to raise the starting wage by $1-2/hr.

  259. Yeah, alright, even my barely-poverty-level household income is more than what many people in the world earn. But guess what? Just because I make more money than people in Burkina Faso doesn’t mean I’m rolling around in piles of cash over here. I’m not “poor” enough for welfare so all my costs come from my own pocket–food, health care, shelter, child care, insurance, tuition, etc. The costs of all of those keep going up while my income remains relatively the same. Funny how you forget to mention all the loopholes and tax breaks some of the wealthiest people in this country get to enjoy…not to mention billions of dollars in bailouts of OUR money because the bankers dicked everyone over.

    Hm…you want me, as a low-income earner, to pay my FAIR share like the richest people do? Sure! I’ll GLADLY pay little to no taxes a year and spend my money however the fuck I want because I know the government is going to give me lots of other people’s money to pay off my debts when I screw up. Don’t worry though, I’ll make sure to put a lot of that money in my own pocket first.

    1. That’s a pathetic response Kim. How much of your money went to bail out banks if you hardly pay any taxes in the first place?

      Here’s an idea, how about get another job or improve your skills so that you can make more? Ah screw it.. it’s easier to complain.

      1. Why is it people here complain that their job doesn’t pay them enough? Time after time, people mention minimum wage or working at McDonalds.

        Minimum wage and McDonalds aren’t meant to be career choices. They are starting jobs, or supplemental jobs.

        Its not employers responsibility to qualify employees to work a job that pays good money. Its an employees job to qualify themself, for whatever job they want and then to go out and get it.

        The problem is there are others looking to get that same job. Which means a perspective employee has to make himself more marketable than the next guy.
        If they don’t, then they’re stuck working at McDonalds, until they figure it out.

        Thats called personal responsibility. I think you and I both get that concept. It seems others don’t quite.

  260. It’s amazing and appalling how many sheep are on this site and in this country. Those complaining the rich/top 1% are not paying enough are ill informed or just jumping on the bandwagon with those that continue to spread their hate of anyone making more money than they do. You’re doing exactly what the government wants yo to do. Class warfare. It’s a known fact (if you do a little homework) the US Government is the only entity year after year with continuous growth and spends more money than it takes in. Stop being the governments class warfare lemmings and learn the facts (And not from your favorite liberal or republican propaganda website). I don’t make a lot of money but when I do I sure don’t want to hand over more of it to a government that has no regard for it’s citizens and continues it’s uncontrolled and wasteful spending. I have to live within my means and cut back especially now so I expect our government to do the same.

    1. I agree wholeheartedly.

      We can complain all we want about OTHERS not doing enough, but what are WE doing.

      Personally, I think those who complain the most about OTHERS not doing enough, are the ones THEMSELVES who don’t want to do more.

      Raw facts tell us that there isn’t enough wealth in this country to sustain spending.
      Spending has increased $1 TRILLION a year, the last 3 years. Our deficit has risen to $1.6 TRILLION a year.

      And yet, people say the rich don’t pay their share. Or that the rich should PAY MORE to help out.
      There isn’t enough MORE to help out with.
      If a boat is sinking and taking on gallons of water a minute, bailing with a thimble ain’t going to do a bit of good. The boat is still going to sink.

      EVEN IF the ludicrous notion that SPENDING MORE would turn the economy around, there isn’t ENOUGH MORE.

  261. Can anyone tell me if I’m wrong that, since FDR, Democratic presidents have outperformed Republican presidents in Economic growth and GDP statistics?

    1. FDR’s policies lengthened the Great Depression.

      Truman was extremely unpopular for his handling of Korea. Inflation was high and the economy fell flat.

      Kennedy wasn’t in office long enough to objectively decide.

      Johnson was such a failure he would have lost in a landslide, if he would have sought a second term.

      Carter. One word. Malaise.

      Clinton. Some good, some bad. Clinton HAPPENED to be in office during the tech boom. He and his policies had no effect on developing the tech market. He was the benificiary of the economy that the tech market drove. When the tech bubble burst, so did the rest of the economy. Technically Bush “inherited” a recession, though a small one.
      Also, the supposed Clinton surplus, was not a result of Clintons policies. Bill’s first 2 years were considered pretty far left at the time, and spending was up. Gingrich and the “Contract With America” forced spending cuts, including a few threats of government shut downs. The spending cuts were not Clintons ideas, they were forced upon him by the Republicans. Congress controls spending. Clinton had to tack right, in order for congress to approve his spending.

      Sorry to burst your bubble.

  262. Americans might be rich when viewed strictly from income alone.

    The problem is, our government has been spending it all and then some. The governments credit card is up to $14.6 TRILLION dollars.
    There are approximately 310 million people in the US.

    That comes out to about $47,000 for EVERY man, woman AND child.
    A family of four’s share of the debt is $188,000.

    This years deficit alone is $1.6 TRILLION

    Thats $5,160 for EVERY man, woman, AND child.

    For a little perspective on how much $1.6 TRILLION is, do a Google search of the Forbes top 400.
    If you add the wealth. Not the income, but the wealth of the 403 wealthiest people in the US, it comes up to just over $1.3 TRILLION.

    To give you an idea. Bill Gates is WORTH about $56 Billion. But Bill Gates makes (income) about – who knows. His estimated worth climbed $3 billion last year. The point is $3 billion is a far cry from $56 billion.

    The thing about wealth is, this is what has been accumulated over the years. Year after year.
    Wealth is your home, your savings, your retirement, your investments.
    When your young, and just getting started in the working world, you don’t have much wealth. But over time, a little here and a little there and it adds up. To the point where your wealth exceeds your income.

    Thats where the top 403 wealthiest Americans are at. Their accumulated wealth is +$1.3 TRILLION.

    ALL that money, of the 403 US billionaires, WOULD NOT pay this years deficit.

    People can cry and scream all they want about being mean, or heartless or “racist”, but numbers are just numbers. They don’t have feelings or motives.
    These numbers are facts. And these facts don’t lie, whether you like them or not.

    Some people like to claim that we should go back to old tax rates, when the wealthiest tax rates were 94%. These people are just uninformed and biased.
    The chart that has been posted near the top of this page shows that the bottom 50% pay an average tax rate of 2.59% and yet the lowest tax rate is 10%. The top 1% pay an average rate of 23.27% yet the highest rate is 35%.

    The point being, that even though the highest tax rate was 94% at one time. NOBODY ever paid 94%
    Just like today, there were write offs and deductions and loop holes. The tax code 60-70 years ago was ENTIRELY different than todays.
    Trying to compare a top tax rate from then, to todays, would be like trying to compare or race a 1944 Chevy to a 2011 Corvette. Yeah, they’re both cars built by Chey, but thats the only similarity.
    Same with trying to look at the highest tax rates of then vs today, and not looking at what all the tax laws and loop holes were.

    Now for argument sake. Lets just take the highest tax rate of history, 94% vs 35% of today.
    Remember, this is just for arguments sake, as yesteryears tax code is completely different from todays.
    If we multiply 35% x 2.685 we get 94%
    Multiply $392,149 (taxes paid by the top 1%) by 2.685
    And we get $1.053 Trillion

    So, the top 1%, in theory, would pay $1.053 trillion vs $.392,149 a difference of

    $660.771 billion.

    Remember, our deficit is $1.6 TRILLION.
    We’d STILL be about $1 TRILLION a year short.

    We are spending about $1 TRILLION more, per year, the last 3 years, than we did in 2007.

    This is unsustainable.

    People tout the government saving us.

    Can’t be done. The numbers don’t lie.

    The government has increased spending, by $1 Trillion. The yearly defict has increased to $1.6 Trillion. And even if we could tax the richest people, there isn’t enough to tax, to make up the difference.

    1. I can’t agree with you more. When will folks realize the government is STEALING US IN BROAD DAYLIGHT with their runaway spending, and taxing the top 10% doesn’t cover their spending? Come on folks, wake up and stop voting for a government who is abusing their power and taking your money and flushing it down the drain with inefficient programs.

    2. well, i think the argument has become people wanting to cut spending but not even touch taxes (or if you are republican, lower taxes on the rich and not make up for it in any other cuts, or cut the benefits to the 99% like education. Before you give me that look: politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/17/david-axelrod/obama-adviser-axelrod-says-republican-want-deep-ed/).

      By all means, trim the fat and close the loopholes. But I think you could cut the defense budget before education.

      1. Our military is considered the best in the world.

        Its first and foremost duty is to protect the people of this nation and its interests. It does that admirably.

        One of the key ways it does that is through deterence. Nations refuse to mess with us because THEY KNOW they’ll get their butts kicked. Terrorism and guerrilla tactics are something entirely different, and something our nation needs to learn and evolve from. That alone takes money.

        But one area, time and time and time again, that our military has shown that it excels in, is humanitarian response. (Imagine that, warriors EXCELING as humanitarians)

        Within hours of a major natural disaster, OUR military has boots on the ground there. Not to conquer or bully, but to aid. Within 24 hours, we had carrier groups off the coasts of Indonesia and Haiti, following the tsunami and earthquake.

        The waters around Indonesia are crawling with pirates. Talk about projection. I can’t think of pirates in their right mind wanting to take on a carrier battle group. And yet our military STILL had to protect shipping coming into the area, to deliver aid. MUCH of that aid coming from other countries.

        Logistics is HUGE in an operation the size required for these humanitarian projects. Unless these were 1st world nations (like Japan), the logistics required are only possible with a top tier government. Logistics controls materials coming in and going out. Food and water distribution and delivery. Law and order control. Search and rescue coordination. And so much other.
        It doesn’t matter if Switzerland sends 200 tons of food for aid, if it can’t get to where it needs to go.

        Park a carrier group off a coast, and literally dozens of helicopters are available for search and rescue or ferrying people and supplies, or even for flying cover for protection.

        A supercarrier itself carries, feeds and houses 6,000 men and women. It has on board hospitals and dental facilities, to care for injured in a time of war. Which means the carrier is prepared for injuries and trauma from a natural disaster. And thats just the carrier itself, not to mention the other ships in its group.

        A carrier has a desalinization plant that can provide water for 1000’s of people.
        Kitchens for preparing food, and food stores, all to provide food for 1000’s virtually around the clock.

        If possible, a carrier could be brought into port and provide much needed electricity. (but that could be a very big undertaking. I don’t know if Haitis power grid could handle that)

        Our military is at BATTLE readiness, always somewhere in the world. Ready to do whats needed in very short order. Its this BATTLE readiness, that makes the US military, the worlds largest and best disaster first responders. NO OTHER country offers what our military does, when it comes to aid.

        Nobody WANTS war.
        But the best deterent to war, is a well prepared military.
        And a well prepared military has side benefits.

  263. Okay, so we’re talking about taxpayers only, not capita, which is everyone who is (legally) employed and earning an income, the bottom ~50% earning less than ~$33K. This bottom 50% gets their taxes refunded.

    Who are they? What tax rate should they get? A 20% flat would mean the MOST after income taxes would be ~$26.4K. Will they be paying Social Security/Medicare? I’m assuming SS and Medicare would be included in their “equal/fair” share. What about Retirement, Medical, Dental? Let’s take it down to a $22 even.

    Say rent is $500/month. That’s $16K left. Then there’s any other insurance (home, auto, life), electric and heating bills, gas if they have a car and/or bus/train/subway fare.

    Then there’s groceries, clothes, kids’ expenses, (leave cable out of it, I guess), cash for unplanned expenses (as little as a broken window on up), and any other cash for disposable income.

    And that’s for the TOP EARNERS of the bottom 50%

    How much is left for Savings? Because investments is out of the question. Where’s the equality in people not even being able to put money into a savings account, where as someone with $1000,000 in savings makes $10K a year in interest alone (at 1%) from doing nothing to “contribute”.

    Where’s the equality in people doing the same jobs for different pay? A trader who plays what’s basically a game of numbers and charts with other peoples $$$ making more than a Neurosurgeon? A broker (me) making $6K commission on 1 TRADE vs. a different broker who only makes $600 on the same trade, just because his client has less money?

    Brokers, Investment Bankers, Traders; we don’t do shit, yet we get paid a ridiculous amount because we play with a lot of other peoples money. It’s an inside joke.

    The inequality comes from the attribute that more money begets more money. That’s simple ROI. That means less gets less, and the wealth gap widens just by simple mathematics alone.

    It’s a PRIVILEGE to be in the top 50%, NOT A RIGHT. You don’t like paying taxes while the bottom 50% people don’t have to? Too bad, deal with it and be glad that you at least CAN PAY taxes. It’s not about SHOULD they, it’s CAN they.

    Stop bitching and be thankful that you’re a have and not a have-not. You already got lucky by being born here in the first place. (you could have been born in China or India, in which case, good luck with that; you’ll need a lot of it now)

  264. The only way to fix this problem is to eliminate TAX loop holes. Corporations, individuals and or any other wage earning entity should pay! No matter what!! This would make it such that everyone had skin in the game not just a select few. This creates a level playing field that can’t be purchased by special interest groups in Washington. Lobbyists tip the scales of justice in this country to the extent that corruption runs rampant….This needs to STOP!

    1. “The only way to fix this problem is to eliminate TAX loop holes. Corporations, individuals and or any other wage earning entity should pay! No matter what!!”

      Corporate taxes on PROFITS are 15% to 35%.
      Corporations pay dividends on PROFITS to shareholders.
      Shareholders pay capital gains taxes of 15%

      Lets talk about loopholes.

      A married couple makes $60k a year.
      They have 2 kids.
      They each get the standard deduction of $5350
      That equals $10,700
      They get one exemption for each of them, that $3700 each
      That equals $14,800
      Total exemptions and deductions is $25,500
      or 42%

      A married couple makes $150k a year.
      They have 2 kids.
      They each get the standard deduction of $5350
      That equals $10,700
      They get one exemption for each of them, thats $3700 each
      That equals $14,800
      Total exemptions and deductions is $25,500
      or 17%

      A married couple makes $150k a year.
      They have 2 kids.
      Instead of the standard deduction of $5350, That equals $10,700
      They have a $400,000 house with a $320,000 mortgage, and pay $12,000 in interest which is a write off.
      They pay $4,000 in property taxes, another deduction.
      They give 10% to their church and charities, $15,000, another deduction.
      They contribute 10% to a 401k plan, $15,000, another deduction
      Total deductions $46,000
      They get one exemption for each of their kids and themselves, that $3700 each
      That equals $14,800
      Total exemptions and deductions is $60,800
      or 40%

      A married couple makes $1,500,000 a year.
      They have 2 kids.
      Instead of the standard deduction of $5350, That equals $10,700
      They have a $2,000,000 house with a $1,500,000 mortgage, and pay $60,000 in interest,
      $40,000 of which is a write off (there is a limit on mortgage interest write offs of $1,000,000 of mortgage debt).
      They pay $20,000 in property taxes, another deduction.
      They give 10% to their church and charities, $150,000, another deduction.
      They contribute to a 401k, $16,000 (the federal limit)
      Total deductions $226,000
      They get no personal exemption for each of their kids and themselves, as these phase out because of income.
      Total exemptions and deductions is $226,000
      or 15%

      In other words, it takes an awful lot of tax breaks and loopholes to match the basic deductions an exemptions that EVERYBODY gets, accept the rich. Besides, $3700 exemptions have little to no bearing on the rich and their tax rates.

      The rich can write off their mortgage interest like everyone else, BUT only up to a $1,000,000 mortgage, no matter how expensive the home.
      The rich can write off 401k contributions, BUT only up to $16,000 ($16,000 on $160,000 is 10%, on $1,600,000 its 1%)
      Personal exemptions begin phasing out at $166,000 for single people and $250,000 for married.

  265. SO right! I have always told others that they CAN succeed if they work at it. I also worked at McDonalds 20 years ago! I then dropped out of high school but now have a college education…finally! I make much more money than I use to but it is because I worked 2 jobs through college and did well FOR MYSELF. Nothing was given to me and now I am wrong for earning more?

    Seriously…go to my FB page if you believe that the “occupiers” would only hurt by enhancing corporate tax disparity:
    facebook.com/pages/Occupy-anything-is-wrong/168596546562168

  266. I love, love, love this thread of discussion. And I just devoured the article on the flat tax. So much of it resonates with me. My husband and I are in the top 5%. My parents had very little, he was raised by a single mom. We both worked our butts off in school and took on a ton of personal debt to get good educations. I had a great job with a large multi-national here in the US, left after starting a family and went back to work as a consultant because we couldn’t live on one income in NJ. I got laid off and guess what – couldn’t get unemployment b/c I had been a consultant. Even after YEARS of paying my taxes in my previous job. We’ve moved to the midwest where cost of living is more reasonable. When unemployment was extended, our neighbor who hires men for construction jobs couldn’t get any one to come in, even though his phone had been ringing off the hook with guys looking for work the week before the extension! When he called someone to come in for a job, the guy replied “nope, I’m good. Unemployment was extended.” And you’re telling me the top 5% should pay for the bottom 50%?? No thanks. I have a work ethic, unlike many others.

    1. AWESOME! I also was from a single mother home. I was “bottom of the barrel” in many respect. I now have a Masters degree and am in the top. Why? Just like you and your husband…HARD WORK! I didn’t complain about not having a lot, I had enough even when earning 10K a year. Now I ear much more and live much better, interesting how the money STILL disappears easily though?! :)
      See if you agree with my FB page:
      facebook.com/pages/Occupy-anything-is-wrong/168596546562168

  267. Michellosaurus

    I didn’t come here looking for a fight, but just some actual, unbiased financial information because like a lot of people, I’m scared of this economy and could use some help interpreting the data that’s out there. I’m smart enough to know that both conservatives and progressives can “spin” the information to advance their position. I thought this site would actually talk logically and impartially about what the tax laws meant, how they were supposed to be used, current financial trends and how to legally and appropriately take advantage of opportunities, etc.

    If you’re going to do an op-ed piece about why the rich shouldn’t be taxed more, you should present it – and the web site as a whole – as an opinion piece, instead of packaging it and your other very opinionated pieces as “slicing through money’s mysteries.” You do a great disservice to your readers, who might actually be coming here to make sense of financial matters without the drivel and spin they already have to wade through every day.

    At the very least, you could have provided a genuine forum where people could have talked candidly – but respectfully and reasonably – about how the tax laws could be revamped to benefit people regardless of income levels. That might have not solved anything, but at least could have provoked REASONED discussion, and possibly spawned creative ideas.

    But no. Instead, you chose to do THIS.

    1. genuine forum? This is plain-speak.
      facebook.com/pages/Occupy-anything-is-wrong/168596546562168

  268. @CharonPDX
    The average income of the top one percent and the lowest income of the top one percent (the cutoff to be a 1%’er) are not the same thing, dude.

  269. How is it equal if I make more money and pay the same tax percentage as someone who makes far less? If I make 100k a year and pay 25% I still have 75k, which anyone can live on comfortably (if you cannot, then you should think long and hard about what it is you are wasting your money, or you have expectations that are unrealistic). Now if I make 20k a year and pay 25%, I only have 15k to live on, which is much more difficult. How is that fair? Mathematical equality has nothing to do with equality in life.

    1. Here’s how its equal.

      For EVERY $100 you make, you pay $25 in taxes.
      For EVERY $100 I make, I pay $25 in taxes.

      Thats equal.

      THIS is unequal.

      I work a job that is harder than yours. So they pay me more.
      I work a job that requires more skill than yours. So they pay me more.
      I work a job that is more dangerous than yours. So they pay me even more.
      On top of all that, I work more hours than you. So they pay me even more.

      Whats ALSO unequal

      Is to think that someone who works harder, works smarter, works better, and works longer than you, should get paid the exact same as you.

      The Declaration Of Independence starts out with
      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

      You have the unalienable right to Life
      You have the unalienable right to Liberty
      You have the unalienable right to the pursuit of Happiness.

      Being that we are beings created equal

      I have the unalienable right to Life
      I have the unalienable right to Liberty
      I have the unalienable right to the pursuit of Happiness.

      The word pursuit is an action.
      The first 2 lines require no action on either of our parts. They are guarantees or assurances.
      The 3rd line REQUIRES action. That action is pursuit.
      The only guarantee or assurance is for Pursuit, not for happiness.

      If it were it would have read
      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and Happiness.”

      You have the right to pursue happiness, however, whenever and how much you want.
      The only limiting factor is where your pursuit infringes upon my or others rights.
      If pursuing $20,000 makes you happy. Have at it. If pursuing $100,000 makes you happy. Have at it. You are free to pursue that. You are ASSURED of that pursuit. You are not GUARANTEED the outcome.

  270. I’m in the bottom 50%. I’m a teacher. If I’m in the bottom 50%, how come the taxes taken out of my paycheck is equal to approximately 30%. That’s pretty close to the 38% that the top 1% pays.

    1. Holy Cow…You are kidding right???

      You’re not actually asking that question AND teaching kids are you???

      First off FICA taxes. You pay 4.2% for Social Security and 1.45% for Medicare. Next is your state income tax, every state is different, mine is 5%. Then comes federal income tax. This is based on, not just your income, but what you claim as deductions and dependents on your w2 when you hired on. But lets say they take out 25%. Thats 5.65% for FICA, 5% state and 25% federal. For a total of 35.65%. Now maybe also in there there are other things being taken out of your check. Things like union dues or 401k contributions or healthcare.
      Also, what might be affecting your withholding is how you’re paid. If you’re paid every 2 weeks, you might be having more taxes withheld.
      Another possibility that happens with teachers is how they are paid throughout the year. Teachers work 9 mos out of the year. Some get paid throught the entire year, others just during the school year. So, a teacher who gets paid throughout the year would get their pay, lets say $33k, paid every week of the year. $33k divided by 52 weeks. Other teachers might get paid only during the school year. $33k divided by 40 weeks. Either way, at the end of the year it will all wash out.

      Then at BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, when you file taxes, you more than likely get a tax REFUND from the government. Basically saying you paid too much tax. Subtract that refund from what you paid in federal taxes throughout the year, and that will be what you paid in federal taxes.

      If you’re single, no kids and making $33k, and claiming just the standard exemptions and deductions, you will have the standard deduction of $5,350 and the standard exemption of $3,700= $9,050.
      Subtract $9,050 from your gross income of $33k= 23,950 AGI (Adjusted Gross Income)
      You will be taxed 10% on your first $8,500 of income
      and 15% on the next $26,000 or less of income.
      So, on the first $8,500 you’ll pay $850
      on the remaining $15,450 you’ll pay $$2317 for a total of $3167
      Now, throughout the year, (if you made $33K) if you paid more than $3167 in federal income tax, take what you paid and subtract $3167, and that will be what your refund is.

      Remember, Federal income tax is not FICA or Social Security and Medicare taxes, nor state income tax.

      So, if you made $33k and paid $3167 in federal income taxes, you paid about 9.6% of your gross pay or 13.5% of your AGI

      Now here is what the top 1% have to pay
      After whatever deductions they might have, they will pay
      10% on the first $8,500 of income (just like you)
      15% on the next $26,000 of income (just like you)
      25% on the next $49,100 of income (UNlike you)
      28% on the next $90,800 of income (UNlike you)
      33% on the next $204,750 of income (UNlike you)
      35% on anything over that (UNlike you)

      As far as I know, there is no limit on state income taxes, so they would pay whatever their state taxes them. In mine its 5%
      Then comes FICA taxes.
      SS is taxed at 4.2% (just like you) UNTIL a gross income of $106,000, after that no SS tax.
      Medicare is taxed at 1.45% (just like you) with no limit or cap (just like you)

      NOW…What changes is if this person is self employed.
      All the aforementioned stays the same,
      but as an employer, he will also tax himself ANOTHER 6.2% for Social Security, again with a $106,000 income limit.
      AND, he will also tax himself ANOTHER 1.45% for Medicare, again with no limit.

      Also, worth mentioning.
      A person who gets paid a stock dividend, does not pay income tax on that dividend.
      They pay a capital gains tax INSTEAD. And thats at 15%, the same as your highest tax rate.
      ALSO…BEFORE the company pays a dividend, they will pay income tax to the government, on the profit that the company made. The dividend payment is the stockholders share of the profit minus the income tax taken out.
      Corporate tax rates are progressive, just like individual tax rates. The more money a company makes, the higher the tax rate. From 15% on up to 35%.
      So, if a person owns stock, in lets say Exxon/Mobil, they will get a dividend check on the profits AFTER 35% income tax AND THEN they will pay a 15% capital gains tax.

      Lets go back to FICA taxes (SS or Social Security and Medicare)
      Remember, if the person is self employed, they will pay an additional 6.2% SS tax (limited to $106K income) and an additional 1.45% Medicare tax.
      They pay this as an employer. As their own employer.
      But as an employer, they also will pay 6.2% SS tax and 1.45% Medicare tax, for EACH employee they have. This is above the withholding tax you see on your check stub.

      Also, something important to note. As an employer, there is another tax FUTA. This is Federal Unemployment Tax Act.
      This is a special tax of 6.0% on up to the first $7,000 of gross income, for EACH employee, each year, that the employer must pay.

      1. Mark Fuckerburg Zucks

        Excellent breakdown that will spin her head. That response was 2011 and now fica goes to 130k in 2019! After I make 130k during the year,I enjoy a nice $700 pay raise. Each biweekly check.

  271. Westchester guy

    I live in westchester NY, which is crazy expensive. If you don’t make 250k here it will be tough to be comfortAble. I bought a 550k house (small here) and my monthly mortgage plus tax escrow is over 4k per month. I grew up in upstate NY in a relatively poor family. But I got financial aid and worked my butt off in college and interviewed 25+ places to land a job out of college in NYC finance. I’ve worked my way up the ladder over the past 10 years working 60-100 hours per week, and now I make over 300k. I pay on average 40% taxes per year between federal, state and soc sec. There is this thing called AMT remember? Property taxes on my house are 25k per year. I’m doing well now but by no means rich. I still have to budget and be careful. People fail to realiZe that most of the people making top 5% incomes have to live in the top 5% most expensive places to live to achieve that generally. Unless you are making 10 million a year, it’s a different story. It should really be the 99.9% against the elite. But even then I’m not sure it’s fair. Inflation adjusted I’m not sure the wealth gap is actually much wider today than vs 30 years ago in terms of actual buying power comparisons…

    1. You should not be taxed more, people in the bracket above you should. I think you should have your taxes lowered honestly. But also you are living the lifestyle that you choose and it is an expensive one apparently…

  272. Hook me up!

    Where can I find a “side job” that pays $1200 a month? I assume I am already working 40 hours a week so let’s say I am working 20 extra “side” hours a week for this. That “side job” is going to pay $15/hour.

    If I moved to a vibrant location, yeah, maybe that wage would be easy to find, but the cost of living would also be much higher so why would I do that just so I could pay more taxes?

    If I stay in my current geographic location, guess what. Employers offering part-time gigs outside of the normal 40-hour work week are not paying $15/hour. I think I would be lucky to find something that paid $10/hour. Most of the job opportunities for part-time non-traditional hours start pretty darn close to minimum wage (local small employers can pay as little as $5.25/hour and large employers have a minimum of $6.15/hour).

    Please, if you know where I can get a reliable “side job” where I could make $15/hour for 20 hours per week outside of my already committed 40 hours per week, hook me up! I would LOVE for something so apparently easy to find to BE FOUND BY ME!

    1. If you work 60 hours a week for 50 weeks a year at $11 an hour, you have just grossed $33,000. Straight up math.

      Do you have any talents to be able to teach them to someone i.e. singing, sports, music? You can make $20/hour++++ there. When I was in my early 20s with no experience I was charging $35/hour for a 1:1 tennis lesson. Rates are now at $60/hour, but I don’t teach anymore as I’ve spent countless hours over the past 2 years building this site and the Yakezie Network. Nobody stopped me.

      Don’t wait to be found. Find yourself.

      1. Exactly…exactly. I went from making 8.48 an hour to making double that, because I got another full time job while I went to college.

        How to make more money: work more or get a better education (in a field that has a chance at succeeding…which means NOT Greco Roman Art Culture- they are dead).

        1. I always thought that womens studies was a good field.
          (At least it was for me, studying women.)

          Unfortunately, I’ve never met a woman who got a job because she had a degree in womens studies)

          I have a friend who likes to brag that HE WENT to college, and got a degree.
          Funny, all these years that I’ve known him, and I have no idea what his degree is in.
          I know he played basketball there.

          As long as I have known him, going on 30+ years, he’s been a semi driver.
          He’s been in and out of jobs (and loading docks) a fair amount the last 10 or so years. I hear him and his wife complain that nobody wants to pay him what he’s worth. Or that they can’t live on what the company wants to pay. Or they talk about his college education and his degree.

          I’m sorry. Ones worth as a worker is only what a company is willing to pay you.
          Its not the company’s responsibility to pay you what you “want” or what you “need”.
          Its a persons responsibility to be marketable, and then to live within the needs of the market.
          Last I checked, college educations weren’t a requirement for driving semis. (unless of course its the truck driving class at the community college)

  273. Just wondering if the tax numbers you have take into consideration the many tax deductions and credits? These typically assist those who are financially well off to lower their taxes, sometimes significantly.

    1. I think I can answer that because these are the typical IRS stats. “Adjusted Gross Income” is pretty much all income for the “entity”(more on that later). For businesses taxed on the individual return, it includes NET income from the business (business expenses are deducted). It doesn’t include tax exempt income (munis, etc) and doesn’t include all of Social Security income). The effect of itemized deductions, lower rates on capital gains and dividends, etc is reflected in the tax liability shown. What’s a bit confusing and annoying about these statistics is that they are tabulated by entity, so joint returns are in for the joint income while single filers are in for the individual. So when you look at the “top 1%” you may be talking about a single person with no dependents or a married couple with several kids. But AGI is the easiest tabulation so many IRS tables are complied that way.

    2. “Just wondering if the tax numbers you have take into consideration the many tax deductions and credits? These typically assist those who are financially well off to lower their taxes, sometimes significantly.”

      Yeah. lets look at that.
      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $66k.
      Standard deduction for both parents $5350 each =$10,700
      basic exemption for each member of the family $3700=$14,800

      Total exemptions and deductions $25,500 or 40%

      Personal exemptions begin phase out at $166,000 for singles and $250,000 for marrieds.

      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $660k
      Standard deduction for both parents $5350 each =$10,700
      Total exemptions and deductions $10,700 or 1.6%

      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $66k.
      Contributing 10% into 401k=$6,600 or 10%

      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $660k.
      Contributing max into 401k=$16,000 or 2.4%

      Of course charitable giving is the same either way.

      But when solid numbers or upper end limits are given, it benefits the lower income earners.

      Those who have a mortgage can write off their mortgage interest.

      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $66k.
      They have a house $200k, with a $160k mortgage, paying $6300 in interest =9.6%

      Husband and wife working, with 2.3 kids making $660k.
      They have a house $2,000,000 with a $1,600,000 mortgage, paying $63,000 in interest
      They can write off $40,000 in interest, because there is a limit of $1,000,000 on mortgage write offs.
      Write off = 6%

  274. Firstly, why are you using per capita measures of income? In a country with inequality as wide as the in the US per capita measures are meaningless. You are an intelligent and educated person so I assume you know that median measures of income are far more important. Why haven’t you used them?

    Secondly, if you are using income tax figures to calculate incomes your numbers will be way off, because the rate caps at $372,951, which is utterly miniscule compared to what the top earners actually make per anum.

    Lastly, I do not know nearly enough about economics to debate point for point with you. But I do know that Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman (two Nobel Laureate Economists) think your arguments are full of shit, that inequality in the US is a massive problem and that the system is being gamed by the wealthy to only benefit them.

    1. Shall we rally against the top 0.1% then? That’s kind of the point. Definitely work on elaborating your case here, or on your site. I read your 1% post, and it was 3 paragraphs long. Not very convincing. Come on now. Do better. Tell us why the IRS stats are wrong etc.

  275. i added up the numbers from the chart. 337 million individual tax returns filed in 2010!!!! the number of people filing taxes is greater that every man woman and child that is said to live in the US. whats up with that?

    1. WOW!!!!

      Ever think about being an accountant?

      ——————-Number of returns with positive AGI
      ALL tax payers . . [ 139,969,580 ]
      Top 1% . . . . . . . [….1,399,606 ]
      Top 5% . . . . . . . [….6,998,029 ]
      Top 10% . . . . . . [ ..13,996,058 ]
      Top 25% . . . . . . [ ..34,990,145 ]
      Top 50% . . . . . . [ ..69,980,290 ]
      Bottom 50%. . . . [ ..69,980,290 ]
      . . . . . . . . . . . . . .—————–
      . . . . . . . . . . . . .[. 337,304,998 ]

      Yup…Yer right, 337,304,998. According to the census bureau there are 312,456,963 people in the US.

      Of course, if we assume that when the top line that says ALL taxpayers, it means ALL, which usually means 100%.

      So if we take ALL or 100% and add the top 1% that equals 101%
      Then if we take 101% and add the top 5% that equals 106%
      Then if we take 106% and add the top 10% that equals 116%
      Then if we take 116% and add the top 25% that equals 141%
      Then if we take 141% and add theTOP 50% that equals 191%
      Then if we take 191% and take the BOTTOM 50% that equals 241%

      Then if we take 337,304,998 and divide by 241 that equals 1,399,605.8 per percentage point.
      Then if we take 1,399,605.8 and multiply it by 100 to equal 100% that equals 139,969,580.

      Or we could just assume that when they say all tax payers they mean 100%

      Or we could add the bottom 50% to the top 50%, which equals 100%

      Whatever way you like works fine by me.

      DOH!!!!

  276. Flawed math.

    Take the bottom 50%. Total AGI $1,074,514,000,000 (since the numbers in the graph are in millions.) Total number of people: 69,980,290.
    Average income: (Total AGI divided by number of people) $15,354.

    Take the top 1%. Total AGI $1,685,412,000,000. Total number of people: 1,399,606.
    Average income: $1,204,204

    I could win the (minimum) jackpot of my state lottery, and still not be in the 1% this year… (And I’m by no means ‘low-income’ now.)

    Also flawed assumptions:

    These are ADJUSTED gross income that is taxable on a 1040. That doesn’t include Capital Gains, which are taxed at much lower rates, and which higher income individuals are significantly more likely to have. It also doesn’t include Medicare or Social Security taxes. Yes, Medicare is a “flat tax” at all income levels. But Social Security isn’t. SS caps. Meaning your ‘effective’ total tax rate drops as you exceed the cap.

    Try NON-ADJUSTED, COMPLETE gross income vs. COMPLETE taxes paid. Then see how the numbers stack up.

    1. How about just looking at everybody whose name starts with a G and over 5 ft 5 inches tall?

      By the time you get through all your scrubbing, the figures will be what you want them to be.

      1. Samurai this guy totally called you out on you posting something flawed and and misleading and this is how you respond… I hope your readers can see how false you are in this article…

      2. Funny, I thought I was asking you to STOP looking at people whose names start with G and are over 5 foot 5 inches tall…

    2. Adjusted Gross Income DOES include capital gains, even though they are taxed at a lower rate.

    3. @CharonPDX

      You said:

      “Also flawed assumptions:

      These are ADJUSTED gross income that is taxable on a 1040. That doesn’t include Capital Gains, which are taxed at much lower rates, and which higher income individuals are significantly more likely to have. It also doesn’t include Medicare or Social Security taxes. Yes, Medicare is a “flat tax” at all income levels. But Social Security isn’t. SS caps. Meaning your ‘effective’ total tax rate drops as you exceed the cap.”

      Ahhh yes, where to begin. Lets start with
      “and which higher income individuals are significantly more likely to have.”

      Capital gains are paid by companies to shareholders. Shareholders are OWNERS of the business.
      Businesses withhold 4.2% in Social Security tax (up to an income of $106k) and 1.45% in Medicare taxes. Those are taxes removed from the employees check by the company and paid to the government directly.

      ON TOP of those FICA taxes WITHHELD from the employees check, the COMPANY must also pay ANOTHER 6.2% in SS taxes (up to an income of $106k) and ANOTHER 1.45% in medicare taxes, FOR EVERY employee, from its own bank accounts.

      As these taxes are a COST TO THE COMPANY, they are a tax deduction to the company.

      Another tax cost to the company are FUTA taxes. FUTA is Federal Unemployment Tax Act. It is a 6% tax on the company, on the first $7,000 of income for EVERY employee. This is for funding unemployment extensions and doesn’t include the initial tax that companies must pay for unemployment insurance when they lay an employee off.

      These are taxes paid by companies, before profits (if there are any). Dividends come after these taxes are paid. Since shareholders are owners of the company, as owners, they are paying these taxes.

      Next. Companies pay corporate income taxes. These taxes are progressive. Meaning the more money a company makes, the higher their tax rate. This tax rate is anywhere from 15%-35%. This rate is based on overall company profits and not on dividend amounts. (Oh, and 15% is for companies making $50k and less. Any company making over $100k is approaching 35%)

      When a company pays a dividend, it is AFTER corporate taxes have been paid.
      The shareholder recieves the dividend and then pays 15% capital gains on that.
      So if a shareholder owns lets say Exxon/Mobil, the dividend they recieve will be AFTER a 35% corporate tax, which they then will have to pay another 15% capital gains tax on.

      Exxons last quarterly profit had an ROI (Return On Investment) of about 2.7% or just under 11% a year.
      Oil companies make about 7¢ per gallon. Government makes about 46¢ per gallon.

      YEAH, them eevil rich guyz made 11% profit.

  277. You do realize that the income split point is the lowest level of income that can be considered in the top 1 %. So why don’t you know what you are representing a little bit better next time.

  278. oh and yes, lets not forget the money I pay into social security that I will never get because it will be given to others.

  279. I’ll admit it I’m quite firmly in the top 1%. I grew up in the bottom 50% and worked my way up, and the only “handout” I took was a scholarship. I wanted to be able to pay for myself and my family, and not have someone else pay for me. Due to location and income/housing tax, I pay about 40% of my income away. While I don’t necessarily think that the bottom 50% should be taxed, why should I, who spent my entire life working extremely hard, to reach where I am, pay for them as well? I donate to charity, and pay massive taxes! If the tax on “millionaires” is 50%, I guarantee many people will hover below that mark, solely because they will pay less in taxes. But despite that, what of the people that just live off of welfare and don’t even try to get a job? Not the ones who can’t, the ones who don’t care. Why should we pay higher taxes to support them? If you want to balance the budget, cut spending on stupid programs and raise taxes slightly (Although I’d rather not have this one, but 1% isn’t a nightmare thought.), and cut “foreign aid” we need it for our own country. No, we don’t need to give pakistan 800 mil in military aid then have them (obv not all, but some in the military, no doubt. And for those who would like to argue with this, I got my information from a mid-high Pakistani official (family friends). ) harbor terrorists and allow the chinese to look at our military secrets. Thank you this was an interesting article!

  280. @Ben
    I am aware that there might be typos. I do not proofread. Disregard them and pay more attention to what I am saying.

  281. It is as simple as this. Were the tax code an equation, it should absolutely not be linear. When you take more of the capital you dont add a proportional amount. You add more than your “fair share”. This is because the relative wealth that each individual enjoys per work hour is disproportionate. Forty hours a week as a Mcdonalds worker yields much less than 40 hours per week as a CEO. Is that fair? Is that equality? If it were simply a matter of working hard I can tell you that there would be a far greater number of wealthy Americans than what exists today. Class warfare is a term pinned to this idea by those that are wealthy and do not wish to part with their money. I cannot say that I blame them, but lets call a spade a spade. This is not in the name of equality, but rather in the name of maintaining the massive disparity that exists between the wealthy and the poor. I cannot say I blame the wealthy, but anybody who exists outside that demographic who believes this load of bs is honestly an idiot.

  282. I am lucky to be firmly in the tiop 1%. One of the problems is that even though wages are 3x higher than 20 yrs ago, the minimum wage is only twice as high. So, even though you *could have* but *didn’t* pull yourself up into the top 50% 20 yrs ago, now it’s just that much harder because the minimum wage earners are farther behind the median wage. Do the math: a single Mcdonald’s job pays about $14,500 a year. Two of them, say McD and BK, working 16 hrs a day, 80 hrs a week (no O/T because it’s a 2nd job) earn $29,000 a year. This is STILL below the median! Are you suggesting they should take a 3rd job and work more than 100 hrs a week? I have never done that in my life. Have you?

  283. I think I know what I pay in taxes as I write the check. I also know what it’s like to be in the bottom 50%. 15 years ago I made $30k. I live in SF where a starter house is $900k and I’m supporting my parents. I may sound like a jerk, but $300k- 35% taxes (state, federal, and SS which I will never see) nets out to about $16k a month. Sounds like a lot, right? A mortgage on a “starter house” in SF is about $6k. I pay my parents morgage/expenses of $4k. Anyone in this kind of job has higher living expenses. It’s just the cost of doing business….So, without those expenses I will net $6k a month when I buy a house. Minus $1k in bills, minus $1k in clothing/entertainment/travel/food which I can’t expense, but is expected in my job. Wow. We are down to $4k. I’m so glad I’m so rich!

    The kicker is that the majority of my career I haven’t made that much. I’m not exactly signing up to buy the private jet or island on a tropical beach. There is uber wealthy and folks that have busted their ass to have a comfortable life.

    PS. Samurai. If you know a nice guy in SF with 10 kids, I’ve been too busy working these past 15 years to focus on my personal life…I sure could use a tax write off! haha

  284. I think in America people think that a good degree is insurance you’ll get a great paying job but seeing how many lawyers and even some doctors are looking for work in this economy, I know that there is no sure thing these days. Trying to have several streams of income leads to the best results, I find.

  285. duffuss McGoober

    People need to be allowed to dream and work for towards it. Some people work hard and some dont want to work at all. We made this system of freedom to allow capitalism very much due to the fact I stated above. Communism certainly did not work. Taking a larger percentage from hard working people’s salarys alone is a mistake…Huge. How many union employees have a deal which allows retirement at age 55 to 6o with a pension paying them 50 to 60% of their income for life? Now compare that benefit to a couple making $250,000 per year with no pensions…one has a salary, one is in sales and self employed paying both sides of fica (15%). If they just got to this income level at age 50 to 53, they will not be seeing SS since its going bacnkrupt. They are not “wealthy” as they can no possibly put away enouph to live like the people with pensions (look at the Fed Gov. Pensions) They have to put away in the area of 1 to 1.5 million to be able to purchase an annuity to get anywhee near those with pensions. Plus they are being taxed around 50% before they 0put away savings. The real issue is the fifly rich….Not the top 5 to 2% earners. Hollywood continues to support the liberal movement as they must in order to work…since it sbillionares who control both Hollywood and the media. I say we stop capitalism from becoming a game of minopoly. Cap what a person is allowed to earn in a year to 1 million. Take 90% of any total assetts over $25 million. Hey…I’m a conservative…..but I and many other conservatives want the fifly rich and hollywood stars and professional sports figures to get real. Leave 49% of the 50% payng taxes and making life livable for the 50% fatasses sitting at home and make the top 1% give back to the deficit and social security any amount they have above 25 million. Finally, my wife and I have decided to take back what we paid in by having her collect SS. $460 per week…. then its my turn. :) I’ll give up the long hours and pay to see what its like to get more than 3 weeks a year off. Sit my my lazy ass and maybe even join a protest or two. Once was in China and had a little china man tell me “we’re goin to beat you. I told him we worked for the same company…he said no we China are going to beat the US. and he smiled. They will, they WORK together with a common goal….and lauph at the lazy union workers and fatass Americans who would rather join a protest than stand togther and face them in their challaenge they are throwing at us.

    1. Have you ever sat and done the math???

      Seriously.

      Go to Forbes and add up the top 403. 403 billionaires. Their worth will not pay this years defict.

      What happens when you take away Bill Gates wealth? Where does it go. Where is it now. In a bank? In a safe?

      No. Its in Microsoft and other companies. How do you liquidate those assets and not destroy the company? In order to liquidate Microsoft assets they’d have to be sold. To whom? You want all the super rich to forfeit their money. If There are no super rich, who will buy Microsoft stock?

      Don’t be too impressed with China. Their economy is quite over extended. With the problems in Greece, Italy, Spain and the US, the leaders are sweating bullets.

      Their economy is built like the same house of cards ours is. There problem is that the foundation for their house is the US.

      Don’t be surprised if within the next year, 2 at the most, you start to hear rumblings from China.

      No country’s economy is safe right now. Even the strongest economies in Europe are being dragged down by the others.

  286. I have never done this before, so excuse me if I stumble through this. I am 61. My husband and I both put ourselves through college. My husband worked 12 hr nights loading freight trains and then went to school during the day. I got my 2 year RN, worked and then went back and paid for my bachelors degree (working full time with 5 kids) . Then went back and got my Masters as a nurse pracitioner ( worked full time and paid for it). My husband is an engineer and has always worked 10-12 hr days. He is currently working 180 miles from home, because that is where the job is. I see him on the weekends. We never, never lived beyond our means. Never had a new car or big vacation. We lived in a small split level home. My husband was adament that we save 15% for retirement. Now we are making decent money, and now everyone says that I have to pay more and more taxes. Do you not have the same options that we had? Are you willing to sacrfice the way we did? I work with the poor, I know the poor. Would someone please tell me why this is fair? One of the main person of “Occupy Wall Street” said “He lost his job and his wife had to go to work!! They live in an apartment in upper east side New York City!!

    1. For everyone who asked about “the old days” and blasted my original post – THIS (Linda’s post) is EXACTLY what I was referring to. A couple who did not feel “entitled” to a standard of living that so many today believe they “deserve” (such as College Graduate in his infinite wisdom at the ripe old age of mid-20s) actually worked their butts off doing whatever it took to make a better living. Neither of them complained. Neither of them wondered if “their children would hate them for not being home all the time”. Seriously, the degree of whining amongst so many in this forum about what they “should” have….Where do any of you get off making the statement that you are entitled to ANYTHING? “Ooh, look at me! I’m a college grad with honors! I DESERVE a good job!” Well, that’s just plain BS. Nobody here deserves anything and if you believe you do, then you’re just buying into political bunk that is spewed by politicians who continue to get votes for promising something that just isn’t a reality. The only think we deserve, as a species, is what we earn. You get to eat what you kill, no different now than 50,000 years ago. Except now its currency instead of meat. Grow up and get a clue if you believe otherwise. And more to my original point, which has been thoroughly butchered into nothing of its original content…”If you are CONTENT with making 30 or 40k a year and not interested in working harder to improve your way of life, then you do NOT have the right to complain about the luxuries you can’t afford. You are NOT entitled to a house, a car, cable, internet, a nice neighborhood, or financial security. EVER. You may want that and believe that your education should allow that, but it is NOT a guarantee to anyone. And if you do not have these “expected” luxuries and you are not willing to do more than what you are currently doing because “nobody should have to work an 80 hour week”, well, enjoy your blue-collar existence. Now, if you have a blue-collar existence and you are happy with that, GREAT! I’m happy for you. Then again, you’re not here on this forum complaining about what someone else should hand to you. To call me ignorant is laughable from the mouths of those that expect entitlement. Strip away government, strip away societal “norms” and strip away “the American way of life” and you are left with the basic truth – get what you work for, nothing is deserved. Taxes be damned, the problem here is the modern day American work ethic. Its in the crapper and every single person complaining is part of the problem.

  287. It’s amazing how people who make less than $250,00 a year try and pretend how people in the top tax brackets feel and how much they pay in taxes. If you aren’t in the tax bracket you have no idea!

    And guess what? Most of the people who are in the top tax brackets have an idea because they were once in the lower tax brackets.

    Ask what you can do for your country and start contributing people! At the very least don’t go after people who are the most productive of society already.

    1. Would this be those who’s productivity was the fabrication of securities exchanges that tanked the global economy? Productive how? How much more does your average CEO produce in a day than the person who cooks their food, manufactures their goods or builds their homes? Earnings are by no means the sole measure of productivity.

      1. Unless you’re the business owner/s who hires the CEO, the income of the CEO has no bearing and no business to you.

        Your just pissed he has more than you.

        If you’re so concerned with employee wages, start your own company and pay people how much you think they’re worth.

        1. Employee wages are not my concern, economic input/output is. I would like to know what exactly it is that a CEO earning 150,000 a year plus a million in bonuses actually produces. As a consumer, it is my right and my responsibility to judge the value of the products and services I purchase to decide if I am spending my money as I see fit. That is how market forces work (in theory) and those forces are the foundation of capitalism as a viable economic model.

          As for “being pissed,” I’m not. I am not in the top tax bracket, but I’m perfectly comfortable and content with my income and my possession. There are those of us who believe that ice is to be lived, rather than just be spent accumulating as much “wealth” as possible.

          As for starting my own company, in order to do so I would need to be able to stay competitive, both in the buyers market and in the job market, which requires knowing what wages come to and what their value for output is.

          And finally, I am not the one who decided to run a blog post exactly about how much people make, thus inviting a discussion about that very topic. I believe that people have the right to earn a fair amount for what they contribute to society, and by no means doubt that a quarter million dollar a year salary can be rightfully achieved, I just want to know what the societal contribution (i.e. production) is which warrants that amount of compensation.

    2. I’d rather give by choice.
      Both how much and who I give to.
      Taxes everybody can pay the same rate.

  288. @Pete
    katlyn, you took the words right out of my mouth!! I have the privilege of being a stay at home mom because my husband and I worked our tails off, earned graduate degrees, put crazy hours in, and became successful. Life is all about choices. My husband is a top 5 percent wage earner and we will apologize to no one. He earns every penny. I also agree, cost of living should be considered. We live is So Cal where a little fixer upper in a good school district costs over $700k. I don’t agree the bottom 50 should pay more but we can’t handle paying any more either. Btw, in CA that amounts to over 55 percent in taxes!!

    1. “katlyn, you took the words right out of my mouth!! I have the privilege of being a stay at home mom because my husband and I worked our tails off, earned graduate degrees, put crazy hours in, and became successful. Life is all about choices. My husband is a top 5 percent wage earner and we will apologize to no one. He earns every penny. I also agree, cost of living should be considered. We live is So Cal where a little fixer upper in a good school district costs over $700k. I don’t agree the bottom 50 should pay more but we can’t handle paying any more either. Btw, in CA that amounts to over 55 percent in taxes!!

      I second that.

  289. I’m barely in the 1% and already pay six figures in taxes. You cannot imagine the live/work balance I have sacrificed, stress level in a high powered job where I can’t “check out when my shift is done”, and pressure that kind of job has… I pay 35% in taxes. I’m single, still saving for a house, and have given up a lot to be where I am. It’s my choice, but why should I have to pay more taxes?

    I agree that the Government should look at corporate tax loopholes, but we are not a socialist society.

    A couple of questions: Why can’t we tax based on where we live? $100k in SF is very different than $100k in Iowa.

    Why isn’t there a luxury tax on items over $100? My ex boyfriend with 3 kids can barely put food on the table, but when he got his tax refund check back, he bought a new flat screen TV.

    If you are in the bottom 50%, you shouldn’t “need” many things that costs over $100. If you are in the top 25%, you would buy luxury items and pay a little more for them.

    1. You need to pay more taxes Katlyn, because the majority of people don’t work as hard, or make as much, and don’t pay as much in taxes, yet they still have an equal vote. As a result, they will vote to raise your taxes, even though you are already paying a higher percentage more and absolute dollar more to fund their lifestyles.

      This is the American way. It’s a beautiful thing to allow someone who pays no Federal income taxes to vote on raising taxes on someone who already pays plenty!

    2. Katlyn, the average person in the top 1% pays 23.27% of their income in federal taxes. You are not paying 35%. You are paying 35% on the portion of your income that is over 379,150. If you want to pay less taxes, you should probably stop saving for that house, and buy it now! Then you can deduct property taxes and mortgage interest. If you make 400K, you may not be able to buy the house of your dreams, but you could buy a starter home anyway.

      1. Janna, what right do you have to tell Katyln what she is paying in tax? Seriously, you are not her and only make 100K a year so how do you know? There are plenty of states that charge a 10% state income tax such as California, New Jersey, and New York City. You think Katlyn only pays 13.3% in Federal taxes when she makes over 400K? Are you clueless?

        Seriously, please stop commenting when you have no idea. It makes you look completely clueless.

      2. Janna, you should probably stop commenting. You make yourself and everybody making less than 380k seem so stupid!

        You are an average paid worker whose highest marginal tax rate is just 25%. It’s pathetic that you are telling other people what they are paying in taxes.

        Just putting 500K into a tax calculator with a 50K mortgage interest leads to a 33% effective tax rate for Federal + State. Pretty sad how little you know.

        1. It’s pretty sad she can’t do math and tells people they are wrong about their own financials when she has no idea. Best to just ignore. It’s a waste of time arguing with someone who is not in the same financial situation.

        2. Wow “Genius”… that is quite a zinger! “You are an average paid worker whose highest marginal tax rate is just 25%. ” You must be quite a little bully on the schoolyard!!

          But wait a second… 25%…. now we’re talking federal only???? I am so confused. Are we talking federal only (as you to me), or are we talking all taxes (as with Katlyn)?

    3. I agree. There’s a huge difference in $100k in SF or NY or Chicago compared to lets say Arkansas.

      A friend of mine sold his house here in Illinois and moved to Colorado.
      Did a lateral move $$$ wise. Property taxes in Colo are 1/4 they were here in Ill.

      Heck, Chicago is bad enough, I can’t/don’t want to imagine SF or NY.

      Its easy for someone in small town Louisiana to think $100k is a lot, if a decent 1200 sq foot ranch home sells for $120k. Its a totally different animal if the same home somewhere else sells for $300k. If the $120k home has a property tax of $1200 a year vs the $300k home paying $6000.

      Then you can add on state income taxes. 7 states don’t have any. Here in Ill its 5%.

  290. Emanuele Lombardi

    The rich always pay more than their fair share. I hope this is sarcasm the wealthy pay overall a smaller percentage of their earnings than most Americans, excluding those below the accepted poverty level. Much of the most affluent only pay capital gains which is taxed at 15% capital gains should be subject to the same income tax that a person that works to earn a living.. period .. anything else is totally unfair.

    Emanuele

    1. “The rich always pay more than their fair share. I hope this is sarcasm the wealthy pay overall a smaller percentage of their earnings than most Americans, excluding those below the accepted poverty level. Much of the most affluent only pay capital gains which is taxed at 15% capital gains should be subject to the same income tax that a person that works to earn a living.. period .. anything else is totally unfair.”

      You have a problem with the capital gains tax rate huh?
      That the wealthy pay a smaller percentage.
      What is the capital gains tax rate?
      And what is the tax rate for a couple earning $85,000 and a taxable income of $69,000?
      What is the corporate income tax rate?

  291. JustaPatriot

    I feel I have to take issue with using the less than half of working household pay income tax. Yes the numbers are right, because included in the 2009-10 stimulus package was the largest tax cut given to Americans ever! Unfortunately these tax breaks will be timing out in 2011 and 2012 so the numbers of households paying taxes will go back to the Bush era.

  292. verbal_conflict

    I support this thought: less taxes for everyone and some serious governmental cuts and no bailout for company who afford more and more to gamble with our money. I’ve recently discovered something quite disturbing: our politicians hate marriages and double income families.
    Suppose you make $50,000 of taxable income (after deductions and exemptions) and your spouse doesn’t work. Together you pay $8500 in taxes. A single person with the same income pays $10,700. You’re enjoying a $2200 marriage bonus. (Even more, if you’ve taken the standard deduction.)
    The penalty comes for double-income marriages. You make $50,000, and your spouse makes $40,000. You pay $19,700 in taxes; if you were both single you’d pay a total of $18,600– about $1100 less.cIs it fair to tax double-income households more? Well, why not? If you have a double income, you can certainly afford to pay more than those of us who have just one.

  293. I can support that! However, lots of people believe in our government, which is why they are happy to vote for tax increases…. well, so long as it’s not going up on them :)

    1. Sam -your original premise indicates that you are one of those people wants to increase taxes… As long as it doesn’t affect you!! Remember??? You want to get an additional $43 per month from the bottom 50% and leave you alone!

      1. “Sam -your original premise indicates that you are one of those people wants to increase taxes… As long as it doesn’t affect you!! Remember??? You want to get an additional $43 per month from the bottom 50% and leave you alone!”

        No…Sam is postulating that the bottom 50% pay the same as us. Or we pay the same as them.
        Either way works.

  294. Iggy Sambeezy

    Wow, I at first felt less intelligent after reading this terrible article. I am very happy to see the comments that have ripped it apart and exposed much of the defunct logic and ignorant statements. I do find the author’s inadequate attempts at defending him/herself in the face of sound logic and examples quite amusing. Case in point the comment directly above mine.

    Point is that you can tax the upper class a hell of a lot more and I promise we aren’t going anywhere. If you don’t like paying for social welfare programs that you don’t benefit from than move somewhere else; simple. As for me, call it a home bias or call it like it is; the rich have it great here in the USA. Even Bill O’Reilly admitted his ‘threat’ that he would “stop doing what [he’s] doing” if the government taxed him even 50% to be completely empty. Besides, more taxes is simply motivation to make up for it somewhere else. One thing that you can not argue with is that it is far easier for the wealthy to make more money based on the fact that we have far superior expendable income for investments, etc. Trust me, anyone in the top 1% knows how to create money out of thin air (potential exceptions are celebrities) and I’m not talking about a second job. So bring on the taxes; we’ll be just fine.

    One last thing. I’m sure most people reading this piss $43 a month if what you said about most being in the top 25% is accurate, but if you think that is true for the bottom 50% you have simply lost touch with reality and you should probably pull your head out of your ass and look around. You kind of sound like a 12 year old that has been watching too much Fox News, but that is a bit of an ad hominem so you can disregard that last part.

  295. I wish folks like you complaining about the segment of Americans who pay little or nothing in federal income taxes would take a moment from your mouth-foaming to consider what it is you’re actually talking about and the implications of your proposals…

    “40-45% of American income earners pay zero taxes.” That’s just flat out wrong. They may pay no income taxes, but they pay payroll taxes (Social Security, including unemployment insurance, and Medicare). Since Medicare is a big contributor to our long-term budget concerns (Social Security isn’t really), it’s simply an ugly lie that lower-income wage earners aren’t contributing toward the federal budget. And guess what… they also pay state sales taxes, property taxes, and other fees. Sales taxes and fees especially are regressive as a percent of income.

    Now what do you suppose will happen if you increase the income taxes on the lower classes? You are disincentivizing work; increasing the so-called “dead zone” where the implied tax rate (including direct taxes plus loss of social services) increases faster than income, encouraging people to not work, or stay in low-income work, to continue receiving benefits.

    The reason that the wealthy pay a “disproportionate” share of taxes is they own a disproportionate share of the nation’s wealth and receive a disproportionate share of the income. If you consider the effective tax rate of all taxes paid, in fact the wealthy on average pay about the same proportion of taxes as their proportion of national wealth. But the point of the proposed “Buffett tax” (more of a principle at this point, actually) is that some of the mega-wealthy pay a much lower tax rate, primarily because most of their income comes from capital gains, which is taxed at a flat 15%, with no payroll taxes at all. So while millionaire baseball players may for the most part be paying the top marginal income tax rates, m(b)illionaire investors don’t.

    Finally, your McDonalds example doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. If you were making $3.50/hr, you’d have to work 35-40 hrs/wk to get $550/wk, and that’s *gross* (i.e. before taxes). Not a lot of room left for a secod job. And even if you didn’t pay any state or federal income taxes, you’d be losing 7.65% of that to FICA. Oh, and that’s with no benefits. Now, the highest minimum wage in the country is Washington state at $8.67. Working 40hrs/wk for 52 weeks/yr, that comes to just over $18k/yr, again before taxes, and typically with no benefits. But those folks can just a second job, right? I mean, there’ll be time to sleep when they’re dead (sped along by lack of health insurance, no doubt).

    Are the poor and low-income better off in the US and the West in general than in many other parts of the world? No doubt. But is that how we should measure ourselves? Against the worst of the world? Hey, in Somalia (and parts of Florida), they have slave labor, so you know, things could always be worse! Then again, in Russia and China they sent their wealthy and educated classes off to reeducation camps, so, you know, things could also be worse for them.

    On one thing we agree, though: the wealthy have no reason to complain.

    1. Again, if you think working more than 40 hours a week is too hard, then you have no hope of making it out of the lower class.

      I didn’t realize the rich are benefitting for the majority of social welfare programs they pay for. Tell me how this works?

      1. Working 40 hours a week with a couple kids is quite difficult. Likewise when the majority of the paycheck goes towards supporting the children, getting them food and getting them clothes and getting them stuff for school so they can try to make something of themselves…and paying for a house, electricity, gas, heat, water, and such…

        Or they could put the money they make from over-40-hours-a-week into paying for a nanny for the time they spend at work. But that would leave little (if any) benefit for the worker (their extra money goes primarily to the nanny) and hence would be rarely done.

        Which is a very nice mirror of what the company-owners do. The cost of one more worker has little profit compared to the cost of hiring so they don’t hire that one more person. That ‘one more person’ must then get social welfare, and it actually quite logical that the greedy person who won’t help someone support their family ends up through taxes supporting the person. [Note: I am not saying that it is the ONLY logical position, but it is ONE of them.]

        1. I work with 600 guys on nights and 1200 guys on days. About 1/2 our job people are travelers from out of the area. Some guys leaving home and family and traveling 2000 miles to work here. We work 6 days a week, 10 hour days, some guys 12 hours. These guys live in inexpensive motels or trailers, out of suitcases.
          I myself drive 120 miles roundtrip, spending 2-1/2 to 3 hours a day commuting.
          But hey, at least its work.

          Do you think thats just A LITTLE MORE than “Working 40 hours a week with a couple kids is quite difficult. Likewise when the majority of the paycheck goes towards supporting the children, getting them food and getting them clothes and getting them stuff for school so they can try to make something of themselves…and paying for a house, electricity, gas, heat, water, and such…

          WAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!! Life is quite difficult, waaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!

          You OBVIOUSLY have no idea what it costs to run a business.
          Companies aren’t interested in cutting employees to save money.
          Companies make money off employees.
          You have a choice. Cut employee and “save” money, or hire employees to make money.
          Of course if business downsizes, then so does employment. Yes, its all about the bottom line. Business environment dictates business actions.
          Cutting employees is never a money making strategy. Its all about saving. Saving jobs, saving the company.

  296. Having lived in Australia, Asia, Canada and United States, Mr. Samurai, I can tell you you are spot on. In places like Australia & Canada, where salary is comparable to the US, the tax rate and the living cost are far more greater there. in Australia, it is said that a household income must be around $100,000 just to maintain an ordinary life in a middle-class neighbourhood.

    Asia is the worst, the salary hardly increased, yet living cost has skyrocketd. Boom in China means millions of more people are wealthy but billions of more people now floating in between – they are not as poor before, but young people have to share accomodation, hardly have any money for meals.

    So by that standard, US is quite fortunate as cost of living remains the most reasonable in the world. People will argue against me about poor economy, unemployment…etc.

    My answer is: At least in the US, you have a freedom and have a choice. You can decide to set up a business, you can decide to move to another city. Most countries do not have choice.

    People say things about China, I have lived there before…no job? The Government doesn’t care, people don’t care, you get kicked out and stay on street next day. Retirement? Pensions? you are on your own…Is this the type of life you know in the US?

    Europe, completely different, tax is close to 50%, yes, you get pensions and benefits but wait until 65, 70 or better, never get there…

    Life is tough in the US, so is everyone else in the world – but which country has the most choices? It is still the USA.

  297. People who tell others to pay more taxes, who don’t pay more themselves perplex me. Those who make $199,999 are the worst.

        1. This is a common misconception, and it’s important for people to understand this. Your MARGINAL tax rate is what you are taxed on your last dollar. In this case 199,999 and 200,000 are currently in the same tax bracket for single people. However, if the brackets changed at 200,000, only the dollars in the higher bracket are taxed at the higher rate. In this case, the ONE dollar (200,000 minus 199,999) would be taxed at a higher rate. The first 199,999 would be taxed the same as the guy that makes 199,999. If you were making 300K, and if the bracket changed at 200,000 then 100,001 would be taked at the higher rate. (300,000 minus 199,999) Also, all your deductions come off the top (off your highest dollars.

          It is NOT true that if you earn MORE, you would end up netting less.

  298. I have to be honest, I haven’t taken the time to read all the comments above. I just wonder Mr. Whatever Samurai, if you’re aware that the lower 50% pay a large percentage of their income in payroll, excise, sales and state and local taxes, for which they’re disproportionately paying compared to the top earners?

    Are you actually saying that, like Gretchen Carlson, that half of Americans are freeloading on the upper half? If that’s what you’re saying then you’d better keep your address secret because those at the bottom may not stay so well-behaved as things get tougher and more unfair. This ain’t the USA I was raised to think it is. Cruelty is in, kindness is out. Embrace the suck Samauri-boy!

    1. Here’s a figure for you, Mr. Schwartz.

      The average amount, nationwide, in tax $$$, that a public school receives is just under $11,000 a year per student.

      How many people pay $11,000 or $22,000 or even $33,000, for THEIR kids to go to school?
      Who pays for that, if it ain’t the bottom 50%.

      Hey, and thats just education. What about school lunch and breakfast programs? Who pays for those. More importantly, who uses them???

  299. MadScientist

    FYI, clarification; the deductions in 23-36 are excluded from gross income. The income reported is of course still there.. but not necessarily taxed at the same rate as ordinary income. It should still show up in the totals of your table though…

  300. Who pays the highest tax rates? Think about ALL the taxes people pay:
    Take a wage earner who makes $30,000 a year. Lets call this taxpayer John. John pays 15% social security/medicare tax on every dime he earns. (Yes, half of that is “provided” by the employer or both halves by self-employed taxpayers.) Then he pays 10% federal income tax on his income to $8,500 and 15% federal income tax on the rest. John pays 4% state income tax. Then he pays $1250 annual property tax on his $70,000 house at an income rate of 4.2%. John pays $300 (1%) annual property tax on his 5 year old Ford Escape which he just paid off. (He paid an extra 8% sales tax of $1440 the year he bought the car.) He spends the remainder of his income on food, medicine, clothing, and goods which are all taxed at 8% sales tax in his state. Once a week he buys a 6-pack of beer and pays special excise taxes on top of the sales tax. He takes two weekend vacations per year and pays an hotel room tax of 12.5% as well as sales tax. He pays a toll tax to drive to work every day. He also pays special gasoline excise taxes and special utility and phone taxes. And when he buys the beer and food and goods, he is reimbursing the manufacturer for a share of the highway tax, property tax, social security tax, and business tax that is added into the price of the beer/food. Taxpayer John doesn’t have any money left to save or pay into IRA’s or any other tax escapes. John is paying about 45-55% of his income in total taxes.

    Compare this to a small business owner Rick with total income of $300,000 a year. Rick pays the 15% social security tax on only the first $106,000 of self paid wages from his business, so he is paying a rate to income of only 5.3%. Rick pays 6% state tax in the same state as John, which is 2% higher than John’s. For federal income tax Ric pays the exact same federal income tax rate (10%) as John on his first $8500 of income. Rick pays the same (15%) rate as John on the next lump of income, then 25% on the next lump ($34,000-83,600), then 28% on the next lump of income ($83,600 to $174,000.) About this time some special tax breaks kick in. Rick gets to contribute $30,000 income-tax-free to a special SEP IRA for small business owners. $25,000 of his income is from non-taxable bonds. The remainder of his income is capital gains/dividends and is taxed at a top rate of 15%, not the 33% normal tax rate. Rick has a $500,000 home and pays $8929 in property tax for a rate on his income of 3% compared to John’s rate of 4.2%. He paid $1000 in property tax on his brand new Ford truck, but his own company paid the other $2000 because the truck is used in town for business. His truck property tax-to-income rate is one third of John’s. Rick’s company paid 67% of the sales tax on the truck and got a tax write-off on 67% of the price. Rick buys about 5 times as much as John per year of food, medicine, clothing, and goods. But Rick’s income is 10 times as much, so Rick is paying sales tax at half the rate John does. Like John, Rick also buys one 6-pack of beer a week, so his excise and sales tax is the same dollar amount but is one tenth the percent of income as John’s. Rick’s phone is necessary to his business so it is paid through his company. Rick pays more toll taxes and utility taxes, but as a percent of income, the rate is lower than John’s. Rick is able to invest some of his company’s earnings back into a new building, so he does not have to show that money as income for taxes. Individuals pay tax on wages they use to pay their food and shelter and transportation so they can earn their wages. Rick’s business has a high tax rate of 30%, but only on its profit. Everything paid by a business to earn the profit is deductible. Rick will pay special capital gains rates of 15% when he sells the business, not income tax rates of 33%. Overall, Rick is paying about 30-40% of his $300,000 income in total taxes, while John pays 45-55% of his $30,000 in overall taxes.

    1. MadScientist

      Well articulated TeranH. I am currently in the top 5% of earners in the US and know for a fact that we are afforded many more tax loopholes and opportunities to keep our money than the poor (my effective tax rate last year was 11.5%). The poor simply have fewer choices and are truly disadvantaged, especially when in sheer survival mode. I know that, because growing up I’ve been working since I was 12 years old, starting from nothing. 5 of us lived in a one BR state subsidized apartment for 8 years, before my mother and I could afford to finally buy a little house with federal program help (she worked, seriously, 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and sometimes more). Sure there are charities and friends and relatives that some people can rely on, but I can tell you, without state and federal assistance in job training, education, food stamps, lunch programs, etc. our family would not be the contributing citizens we are today. There are definitely abuses of these social support programs that must be vetted out and stopped, but I do not believe in judging the entire set of programs by those abuses. The rich owe a lot to the people that work for and with us, and to the governments that provide and support our physical and commercial defense, the education of our workers, and the physical and virtual infrastructure that our customers, supply chain and product distribution networks avail themselves of. Hell, even the internet was spawned by a government activity. As a business person I work, and have worked with many government agencies that supported both my individual businesses and my industries as a whole. I am happy to work within specific regulations, and in fact my business strives to perform BETTER than certain regulations, as we know the value of protecting things like the environment, intellectual property, and our public relations (ie, good corporate citizenship). I am happy to support those agencies through tax dollars, and sometimes give more than what is asked. I also know, that as a person of wealth, and as a successful business person, there are many, many business people, and those of great means, that are not as “altruistic” as I am. Actually, I dare say some “captains of industry and wealth” are down right sociopaths when it comes to greed, corruption and the accumulation of “more wealth, power, and “stuff””. If you have ever watched the “Housewives of “Insert Name of Major City here”, you have only seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to self-indulgent behavior. I know for a fact, that many of these types of people will not voluntarily “give back” to the society that has enabled and supported their success, any more than they absolutely have to, and very often not even that (that’s what crafty accountants, and off-shore accounts are for). There is a reason why the income disparity in this country has grown, along with poverty rates. Some people have convinced themselves that they alone are responsible for the fruits of the efforts of hundreds, sometimes thousands of people, and the network of support systems they get from their government and other support groups. To think otherwise would cause them to wonder why they have accumulated such wealth and power and pull down the salaries they do (am I jealous, no – I live very comfortably and define my “wealth” in different ways :)). Many of them do work hard, and spend lots and lots of time “making money” in many ways. Some of those ways are honorable, productive and helpful to society, their customers, and the general public, some of them are not. Some are deceptive, ill intentioned, and downright dangerous to either public health, safety, the environment, and society as a whole, but it doesn’t matter, because profits and shareholder “value” are king. So do I feel bad, or am I bitter that the wealthy are asked to return some of their gains back to the society that helped create it -versus- asking someone who is just trying to survive to do so? Absolutely not. I will also vote that way as well, much to the chagrin of some of my fellow wizards and hob-nobbing socialites. There is still good will and altruism in the world, in spite of Ayn Rand’s rantings, just not enough of it, and there are forces out there that are trying to make sure that doesn’t change.

    2. Good analogy. The table in the article is base on AGI which is after deductions, of which the top 50% will have more than the bottom 50%.

      1. MadScientist

        Absolutely misleading. The table should be based on gross income.
        There is likely a huge chunk of income not counted in the upper 50%.

        1. MadScientist

          Everything from line 8A to 36 on IRS form 1040. If you follow the thread you will
          notice a HUGE one — line 13. This is where rich people get to pay far less
          income tax on wealth that comes in the forms of capital gains and deferred
          income, and is the basis for the “Warren Buffett Rule”.
          https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf

          The original idea to have this taxed less than ordinary income is an honorable
          one, to encourage capital investment. Unfortunately smart people have figured
          out how to abuse it via what the definition of capital gains has become, and it
          appears to not be helping in terms of growing brick and mortar, equipment based
          investment (e.g. job producing in the US). It’s a nice benny for those that are
          compensated via stock options and other deferred income however, driven by
          the lobbying efforts of the financial sector and executives of many corporations.
          capital investment in this country.

    3. WOW, have you totally skewed and screwed everything.

      Here’s the reality.

      John works for Rick.

      John pays (Rick withholds) 4.2% for SS tax
      John pays (Rick withholds) 1.45% for medicare
      Rick pays out of his pocket 6.2% for SS tax for John.
      Rick pays out of his pocket 1.45% for medicare for John.

      John makes $30k a year.
      Johns standard deduction is $5950
      Johns basic exemption is $3700

      John made $30k but will be taxed on $20,350
      The first $8,500 will be at 10% = $850
      The remaining $11,850 will be at 15%= $1,778
      For a total of $2,628
      or 8.8% of his pay.

      Rick pays not only 6.2% SS tax for John, but for EVERY other employee he has.
      Rick pays not only 1.45% medicare tax for John, but for EVERY other employee he has.
      Rick pays 4.2% SS tax on himself, as an employee, up to $106,000
      Rick pays 6.2% SS tax on himself, as an employer, up to $106,000
      Rick pays 1.45% medicare tax on himself, as an employee, with no limit.
      Rick pays 1.45% medicare tax on himself, as an employer, with no limit.

      Rick writes off ALL SS and medicare taxes he pays as an employer.
      Rick does not write off SS and medicare taxes he pays as an employee.

      FICA taxes combined were 15.3%, until the 2% SS reduction, on employees contribution. There is no reduction for the employer. And medicare taxes, which are 2.9% of the original 15.3% FICA taxes, are taxed with no limit on income. Whether one makes $30k, $100k or $300k, 2.9% medicare taxes are taken out.

      The very fact that you miss this VERY BASIC point and yet point out other things not known by the average tax payer, suggests a deliberate omission and an attempt to mislead, and calls into question some of your other points.

      But lets start with a few.
      The biggest is you choose to change the standards by which each individual is taxed. You put John in one state vs Rick in another. You conveniently put one person in one area, while another in the other. If we reversed the locations, or even kept them the same, your comparison wouldn’t have been so starck. Or John could move to Ricks state if he doesn’t like his taxing.

      Here, lets tweek the scenario a little bit.
      Both John and Rick are married with 2 kids.
      Johns wife, Sally, works making minimum wage. Ricks wife, Ann, works as Ricks secretary and makes $50k.

      Sally pays 4.2% SS tax and 1.45% medicare tax.
      Ann pays 4.2% SS tax and 1.45% medicare tax, Rick pays 6.2% SS tax and 1.45% as Anns employer.

      John and Sally file married jointly. They each get $5950 standard deduction which is $11,900. They also get a $3700 exemption for each of them and both their kids, which is $14,800.
      Their combined income is $45,000.
      Their standard deductions and basic exemptions are $26,000.
      Their taxable income is $19,000.
      Because they’re married filing jointly, they pay 10% in federal income taxes on the first $17,000 which is $1,700
      They then pay 15% on the remaining $2,000 which is $300.
      Total they pay $2000 in federal tax on an income of $45,000, which is 4.45% of their gross pay.
      Because they made so little and have 2 kids, they get an EITC refund (earned income tax credit) of $5,036.
      Meaning in actuality they paid no federal income tax and got an extra $3,036 from the government.

      You mention ” About this time some special tax breaks kick in. Rick gets to contribute $30,000 income-tax-free to a special SEP IRA for small business owners. ”

      Well this is WRONG!!! Its not income-tax-free. Its tax DEFERRED. When the person starts withdrawing money from this IRA, they will be taxed on the full amount withdrawn every year.
      Also, anyone with a small business can set up a SEP, its not limited to making $175k or more a year.

      You mention the taxes John pays when he goes on vacation or the beer he buys. Rick pays those same taxes also.

      You also don’t mention the commercial property tax Rick pays, for the office and factory that John works at. Commercial property taxes are sometimes twice what residential taxes are.

      Don’t forget utilities. If Rick is getting his utilities at a corporate, they are generally higher than residential rates.

      Also, your skewing taxes on company stuff vs personal stuff, and business operating expenses and income. You can’t start off with the premise that Rick makes $300k, AND THEN pays taxes. When it comes to business, gross income is offset by operating expenses. Operating expenses are payroll and utilities and taxes and other things.
      Ricks income would be AFTER operating expenses. You cannot lump Ricks company truck and those expenses and then at the same time attribute it to personal income.

      When you mention the property taxes they pay, its important to note that Rick pays lower taxes NOT because he’s wealthier but simply because he lives in another state. John could pay lower property taxes also if he lived in Ricks state.

      With everything you mentioned, You haven’t owned a business.
      And if you have, and YOU are doing your taxes, and this is the way you view or itemize things, you’re going to be hearing from the IRS in short order.

  301. FS, the trouble with your way of thinking is this: if the average worker in a county in Kansas earns 22 per hour (which includes those earning minimum wage and those earning 47 per hour) do you see any way in the world that the minimum wage earner (who exist in order that those earning 22 per hour may have a good life) will catch up in standing? Your concept of a fair tax structure is wanting actuarial sense. The number who earn minimum wage cannot decline because the number of jobs available at higher wages is stagnant. The GDP is moving upward, floating boats without leaks. Leaving nada for those with ambition but naught but minimum wages. FS, you’re a joke.

    1. Your argument is simply wrong.

      The job might be minimum wage, and static, never moving or changing. But the worker isn’t. 40 years ago, as a kid, I had a paper route. Not even minimum wage. I did that for 4 years. At 15 I got a work permit and started busing tables. Did that for 3-1/2 years. Went to college full time while working at a hot dog stand almost full time. Did that for 2-1/2 years. Bussed tables again for 6 months while “finishing” school. Got my first welding job 2 months before “finishing” school. Moved from one welding job to another, always moving up in pay. Took a cut in pay to become a construction worker, and have moved up since.

      There are still people bussing tables and working in hot dog stands. They don’t HAVE to stay there. They can get an education and/or develop a skill and move on.

      Working at McDonalds isn’t a career choice, unless you want to move along in management. And then, thats a CAREER…CHOICE. (With emphasis on CHOICE. One chooses what they want to do for a living. And with that choice comes outcome)
      And your absolutely WRONG about jobs at higher wages being stagnant.
      You’re telling me, that the amount of people making $250,000 a year or more, in this country, is the exact same as it was 10-15 years ago? That would be stagnant.
      All one has to do is look at tax revenues and the income brackets who pay them to know that there are more higher paying jobs today than there were 10 years ago.

  302. zeus omally

    If you are earning less than $33,000 AGI a year(bottom 50%) it will most likely be necesary for you to take out a 30-year loan in order to afford even a modest home, even if you pay almost no taxes. Most of your cost will be in paying off the interest on the loan. Everything else you earn will be used to meet your basic needs:transportation, food, clothing, rent, daycare, medical bills, a few basic luxuries etc.
    If you are earning $160,000 AGI a year(top 5%) you can afford to buy a nice home IN CASH every three years(130,000 after taxes, and it is reasonable to meet ALL of your basic needs on $40,000 a year. That leaves a potential of $90,000 a year of savings. 90,000 multiplied by 3 is $270,000, which should buy you a very nice home in most places of the country).
    But I’m supposed to feel sorry for the guy who makes 160K a year because he has to pay 20% taxes?! BOOHOO, cry me a river.

    1. Why does a person making 33k “deserve” to buy a home?

      The majority of folks who make $160 k do NOT live in an area where they can buy a 130k home bc none exist!

      In SF, a 3 bedroom home in a mediocre area costa 700k. You areclearly speculating what it’s like to make 160k and have no IDEA.

      Don’t you think people who use to make 30k and now make six figures plus have a way better idea?

      1. Sam – No one “deserves” to buy a home, nor do YOU “deserve” to pay less taxes. But if someone one with low income is able to buy a home with a mortgage who are YOU to question whether they “deserve” it?

        1. Of course I deserve to pay less taxes. I should not be discriminated against. Don’t you know discrimination is illegal? Once you make over $200K, you’ll understand.

        2. Sorry, you can’t say that. I’m not in the lowest marginal tax rate and I don’t feel I’m being discriminated against. This is not discrimination and it’s not illegal. Everyone, you, me, even the guy making 30 million pays the same 10% on their first 8k of regular taxable income, 15% on their next 26k, 25% on their next 48k, 28% on their next 90k, 33% on their next 202k, and 35% on anything over 374k. If you are making 400k gross you probably don’t have any income in the 35% bracket because of your deductions. Anyway look on the bright side and thank your lucky stars you aren’t Michael Jordan. MOST of his 30 million income would be taxed at the 35% rate whereas for you it is probably little to nothing!!

          1. Uh, of course you don’t feel discriminated against, you aren’t in the 33% and 35% income tax bracket.

            I love it when people tell people in the highest tax brackets how much we pay and how we feel when you have NO IDEA.

        3. Ah… but what you don’t know is that I used to be in a higher tax bracket than you have ever been in…. and when you tell people in lower tax brackets (I am not talking about myself now) that you know how they feel because you once made 30K….. YOU never made 30K while trying to support a family, so you have NO IDEA how that feels.

          1. That’s fair. And so when you were in a higher tax bracket which was hopefully being assailed like now, what was your view?

            Why didn’t Warren Buffet fight for higher tax rates when you wasn’t so rich?

        4. Honestly, it was just a fact of life. I don’t think I thought much of it at all, except I do remember being amused by people who apparently didn’t understand marginal tax rates, and who lived in fear that they would make too much which would push them into a higher tax bracket, and that somehow they would end up netting less! (kind of like what “Genius” below seems to be implying…)
          I don’t understand your second question. But if there were a new tax bracket for the excess over a million dollars, you really think that would be a bad thing?

    2. Well now we know why your in the$33k and under crowd.

      Your too stupid and ignorant to be able to EARN above that.

      Case in point “If you are earning $160,000 AGI a year(top 5%) you can afford to buy a nice home IN CASH every three years(130,000 after taxes, and it is reasonable to meet ALL of your basic needs on $40,000 a year. That leaves a potential of $90,000 a year of savings. 90,000 multiplied by 3 is $270,000, which should buy you a very nice home in most places of the country).”

      $160,000 AGI, which means at least $180k gross income.

      $4,452 SS tax
      $2,710 Medicare tax
      $6,572 Self employed SS tax
      $2,710 Self employed Medicare tax
      $8,000 State income tax
      $38,417 Federal income tax
      ———-
      $62,861 just in taxes

      Lets compare that to someone making $42,400 gross, $33k AGI

      $2,395 FICA taxes
      $1,650 State income tax
      $3,675 Federal income tax
      ——–
      $7,720 in taxes

      I make the kind of money I do because of a list of things.

      FIRST- After HS I went out and got an education. Maybe I only went to a community college, but the education served me well. It helped me develop the knowledge and skills I need and use.

      SECOND- I CONTINUE to get an education. 30 years after graduating HS I’m still going to school, still going to seminars and workshops, still reading, still trying to learn more.

      THIRD- I travel to where the work is at. I spend 2-3/4 hours a day on average, commuting back and forth to work. (I did this LOOOOOONG before I was making good money) I also travel away from home at times, because thats where the work is at.

      FOURTH- I put in loooooong hours.
      10 hour days are the norm, sometimes 12, occasionally 16 and once in a great while 24, to get the project done. 5 days a week is an easy week. 6 days is pretty standard. And once in awhile 7. My average week is 6 days at 10 hrs. But when its time to s#!t and git, 7days at 12 hours is typical. And when the project absolutely must get done, 7-16’s.

      FIFTH- I do what the AVERAGE person won’t. I work in conditions that 90% of the people would run away from screaming. The AVERAGE person would complain about being too cold, or too hot, or wet, or dirty, or too high, or, or, or, or ,or.

      SIXTH- I work harder than not just the AVERAGE, but harder than MOST people. My line of work would make the AVERAGE person cry. When I work with friends who tell me HOW HARD they work, and HOW HARD their job is, they start complaining when they work with me, that they can’t keep my pace, or they’re taking breaks more often than I do, or complaining how hard the work is, or how tired they are. My response is “Hey, I work like this all the time” “I thought you said your job was hard, I do stuff like this all the time”.

      SEVENTH- Oh, thats good enough, IS NOT good enough.
      There are only 2 words I hate more than “thats good enough” and they are “I CAAAAAAAN’T” (Waaaaaaaaaaaaah)

      The money I make is because of ALL these things added together. I often get called back because of what I can do, how I can do it, what I’m willing to do, and the quality that I put in.

      Years ago, I worked in factories, and realized by my mid 20’s that I was as good as I could get in those settings. There was no more challenge. And I was HUNGRY. And still am.
      If I was still working in factories, I’d be making 50-60K gross. MAX.

      Next, there is one thing that is more important than money. Because without this, it doesn’t matter if you make a little or a lot. You’d still be broke.
      Thats wisdom. Wisdom in living right. Wisdom in making wise decisions. Wisdom in proper financial planning. There are people who live better and are in better financial shape making $40 or $50k, than some who make $75 or $80 or $90.
      All because one makes better choices.

      I could care less whether you cry for me or not, on how hard I work and how much I pay in taxes. I chose my line of work, and I LIKE what I do. Not because of (or not only because of) the money. I’m PROUD of the work I do, vocationally and qualitatively. I’m PROUD of my work ethic.

      I-EARN
      Let me repeat that…I EARN…everything I make.
      The government didn’t make me what I am.
      The government didn’t give me special considerations.
      The government didn’t allow me something it didn’t allow somebody else.
      I don’t steal from others.
      I don’t cheat others.
      I don’t step on others.

      I help those I can help. Whether financially or physically or whatever.
      I feel…I…am here to help people.
      I also KNOW, that I’m a better judge of character and better judge of work ethic than a government bureaucrat.
      I also KNOW, that what I do with MY money, to help others, will be 10 times better than what the government will do.

      The same as you won’t cry for me, as hard as I work, and the money I make and the taxes I pay, I won’t cry for you for how you work, or the money you make or the taxes you pay. Its your life. You make your choices each day. You live with them.

      Somebody in my life has a tragedy or an unexpected down turn in their life. I’ll help them. I’ve done it before AND I’ll do it again. I’ll help the less fortunate who I have never met.
      But I OWE no one anything. If you’re not willing to do… EVERYTHING… that YOU CAN DO to provide for you and your family, its not MY RESPONSIBILITY to.

      1. zeus omally

        Okay, first all MountainMan, it is clear that your education did not include a course in debate, because if it had you would know that it is extremely bad form to insult your opponent and even more foolish to make assumptions about them.
        I actually make about twice the 33k that you assume I do. I do some of the most brutal and dangerous work on the planet. I have a small business(sole propriotership), and I have a 4-yr degree from a very good college. I, like you, also travel extensively for work.
        So I think you owe me an apology of sorts for your unfounded insults and demeaning assumptions.
        But let’s get to the meat of the subject…I think you missed the point of my original post. I do not begrudge wealthy people their wealth, but I do begrudge wealthy people who complain about how unfair the world is for them. The guy who wrote this article is implying that he is being discriminated against because he pays “more than his fair share” of taxes. If you are in a high income bracket, congratulations, you have most likely earned it by working hard. But to insult those who are poorer than you as being lazy and/or stupid and to claim that you are being picked on for being rich is absurd.
        Many people in this country work their butts off for very little pay and have done so for their entire life and, most likely, their labor made someone else a great deal of wealth. So, once again, don’t expect much sympathy from me when someone in the top 5% of income earners starts wining about unfair taxes are.

        1. What an idiotic response.

          You’re right I never took debate. I don’t have time to mollycoddle people.
          When they need a bitch slap, they get it.

          You whine about others complaining that they pay more than their fair share.

          Actually you said:
          “The guy who wrote this article is implying that he is being discriminated against because he pays “more than his fair share” of taxes. If you are in a high income bracket, congratulations, you have most likely earned it by working hard. But to insult those who are poorer than you as being lazy and/or stupid and to claim that you are being picked on for being rich is absurd.
          Many people in this country work their butts off for very little pay and have done so for their entire life and, most likely, their labor made someone else a great deal of wealth. So, once again, don’t expect much sympathy from me when someone in the top 5% of income earners starts wining about unfair taxes are.”

          You’re right MOST of the people who are in the upper 5% have worked hard to earn it.
          This is where their labor differs from others around them. I’ve worked hard all my life. Worked in factories, early in my career, with others, doing the same work. What set me apart wass hunger. Hunger to learn. Hunger to excel. While others were content to just show up and do their job, I wanted to do mine better. I wanted to be faster.
          I took machine shop courses in college, after my auto mechanic and welding courses. When the machine shop was behind, I was called over from the welding shop to give an extra hand. Because of my versatility it allowed me to work with model makers to develop jigs and fixtures because I could think like a welder AND a machinist. With an auto mechanics background, it also allowed me the critical thinking required to KNOW how things worked.
          Most of those around me WANTED to do just what was required of them day in and day out. Every part we made was time studied, as to how long it should take to make pieces. If we were at 80% or above we were in the green. Below 80% was in the red. Department average was 94%. With 54 people in the department. My average was between 125%-175% sometimes reaching 215%, depending on the parts being made.
          I was the youngest person in the department, and next up to be “master welder”.
          I was sent to other areas of the department to trouble shoot things and possibly tweek things to improve production.
          There were some who resented me, because my performance skewed results. Results they were happy with. Most people respected me and my abilities.
          My problem was, I couldn’t see anymore challenge. I was as good skill wise as the job would allow. I could jump into anywhere in the welding department and INSTANTLY match the most seasoned welders, if not surpass them. I could also go almost anywhere in the machine shop and take over for someone, and run at almost their level. Time study wise my numbers were in the green.

          This wasn’t luck. This was determination.
          I also couldn’t see myself improving much more. There was nothing much left to learn there. And I couldn’t see myself working in THE SAME PLACE doing THE SAME THING with THE SAME PEOPLE…year after year after year, for the next 40 years.

          So I MADE the opportunity and left.

          Today my skills and talents have far surpassed anything I could do back 23 years ago. Skills and talents that were advanced THEN.
          I have broadened my knowledge in many different areas, not just limiting myself to one small area of expertise.

          49 years old, and STILL going to school to learn more or get better.

          This makes me more valuable, in 2 ways.
          One-my knowledge and skill earn me a MUCH higher base pay than I was making 23 years ago-when others thought I worked too hard.
          Two-When things get slow, I have a tendancy to keep working because of how I work and what I can do.

          School just means I’m learning more, so that I have another avenue, to working more.

          Next, I work in conditions that others won’t.
          I put in the hours that others don’t.

          There are people like me, all over, who EXCEL because of their work ethic. They are the top 5%.

          40 hrs in a factory doesn’t get you into the top 5%.
          You have to go BEYOND the norm. BEYOND mediocre. YOU have to chose to be better than everyone else.
          And yes, that sounds arrogant.
          But then, everyone else is making what everyone else is making.
          Nobody waves a magic wand and suddenly, voila, high income.

          I have to prove my skill on a regular basis, day after day. to keep me working, when others aren’t.

          After all my “work” that “earns” me my income, I take a portion of that and invest. That takes more work. Investing isn’t something you just DO, and then reap rewards. Theres work involved learning financial basics and strategy. There’s work studying trends and current conditions. There’s work implementing the investments.

          This is all MORE WORK than the AVERAGE person can do, because they didn’t do the work I was willing to do.

          So now…I work harder, smarter, more hours, in worse conditions, THAN THE AVERAGE person is willing to work. For that I earn more than the average person earns. And now you want to tax me and people like me at a higher rate.

          Thats called a double standard.

          I’d have no problem to be taxed at the same rate. Whether I make $50,000 or $250,000, just tax me at the same rate.

          You said : “I actually make about twice the 33k that you assume I do.”

          That means if you’re married, your highest tax bracket is 15%, pretty average.

          Mine currently is 28%
          Your 15% and my 28% are quite aways apart. Seems to me a double standard (Almost literally DOUBLE).
          You have no real idea of what I do, and yet YOU ASSUME, that me, and others like me should be held at a double standard.

          My investments, are taxed at 15%, the same as you. My capital gains, if realized in less than a year are taxed at 35%. Almost 2-1/2 what you pay.
          My investment dividends are taxed at the corporate rate of 35%, again almost 2-1/2 your rate. I THEN pay a personal capital gains tax of 15%.

          Yep, sounds like a double standard to me.

          As far as your statement: “Many people in this country work their butts off for very little pay and have done so for their entire life and, most likely, their labor made someone else a great deal of wealth. ”

          My labor has been PART… of making other people wealth.
          Most importantly it MAKES ME wealth.
          VERY, VERY, VERY seldom does one persons labor make another person rich.

          You say: “I have a small business(sole propriotership)”
          If thats the case, then you know that you don’t make alot of money off any one employee. In fact with what you state as an income, you’re not. Wealth in a company comes from making a little bit from a lot of people. Sam Walton wasn’t made rich by A Walmart greeter. He was made rich by 1,000’s of Walmart greeters and cashiers and the like. In FACT…EVERY Walmart employee made more money from Walmart than Walmart made from them.

          If thats something you can’t comprehend, your business is sure to fail.

      2. zeus omally

        mountainman,
        Once again, thanks for the insults to my personal intelligence. You’ve also made, once again, some inaccurate assumptions about my tax status, but let’s save that for later. Let’s get to the meat of the issue.
        There are many things in your last post that I take objection to, but for the sake of simplicity I will comment on just two:
        1) You claim “This wasn’t luck. This was determination.” when referring to how much you excelled compared to your fellow workers. A typical claim I hear from my conservative friends who are even moderately successful is that they “did it all on their own, with no help from anyone else..”. You know, the ol’ maxim about “pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps” etc. The problem with this type of argument, of course, is that luck had a lot to do with your success and the determination you are so proud of did not develop in a vaccum. We’ve all been the beneficiaries(or victims!) of economic systems, schools, parents, friends, teachers, environment, religious leaders, infrastructure, random chance etc…and that includes YOU too mountainman. So before you pat yourself on the back too hard, you may want look around you and give a bit more thanks to the good fortune that you have encountered on your path to success.
        2)Your use of the term “double standard” to describe an individual of a higher income being taxed at a higher rate than a lower income earner is, I believe, a misuse of the term and is a good way to highlight how you and I see things differently. A double standard is “the unjust application of different sets of principles for similar situations”(got that from Wikipedia!). The problem with your use of the term is that a man making 40k a year is not in a “similar situation” as a man making 240k a year. In fact, I attest that it is hardly similar at all!; The man at 35K trying to support a family will stress every day about meeting the basic necessities of his family(food, clothing, shelter, a decent education for his kids etc.) while the man at 235k a year need not worry much at all about meeting these basic necessities. His biggest stressor, in fact, may be how he is going to invest all of the extra cash he has left over after meeting the basic needs of him and his family. So, since the situations are so extremely different, I have no moral qualm whatsoever about embracing a tax system based on a PRINICIPLE of progressive taxation. Get it?
        3) I know I said there were two points I wanted to make, but I want to throw one more observation out there: There are many ways that people can become rich and not all of them are noble. There are many ways people become poor, and not all of them are ignoble.
        I do not understand why you take this issue so personally. The fact that I expect you to pay a higher tax rate than myself is not meant to suggest to you that you are undeserving of your success and your material compensation. I pay a higher rate of taxes than many( I am single and with no children by the way and make over 60k) and I do not take this to mean that those less wealthy than myself are being given preferential treatment or that I am being discriminated against. I just take it to mean that I am in a much better financial state and, in turn, I should contribute back a bit more to the common good. At the end of the day, I am still happy, wealthy(by my standards), and healthy, so I’ll leave the complaining to the likes of the FinancialSamurai, and I suggest you to do the same.

        1. “You’ve also made, once again, some inaccurate assumptions about my tax status, but let’s save that for later.”

          No lets take care of that now.
          You said:
          “I actually make about twice the 33k that you assume I do.”

          and you just admitted:
          “I pay a higher rate of taxes than many( I am single and with no children by the way and make over 60k)”

          So Mr. I’moffendedthatyouinsultmyintelligence,
          Here we go. You stated first that you make twice the $33k. Then you stated you make over $60K. So lets go with the $66k

          You said you’re single no kids.
          First lets start with the personal deduction of $3700. That brings $66k to $62.3.
          Seeing you have a business, I’d assume you own a house. At $66k income, that would mean your house is about $200k, with a 20% down payment, meaning your mortgage is about $160k, with mortgage interest payments of about $7000, which brings your taxable inc to $55.3k. Subtract property taxes, I’ll guess $2k, thats $53.3k. Lets not forget 401K contributions. I’d figure 10%, thats $6.6k. Thats reduced your taxable income to $46.7K

          So oops, I was a little off.
          Lets do the math
          Your first $8500 is taxed at 10%=$850
          Next, $8501-$34,500 is taxed at 15% = $3,900
          Your remaining $12,200 is taxed at 25%= $3,070

          So about 18% of your income is taxed at 25%.
          Or about 35% of your taxable.

          Lets talk about what you call “LUCK”.
          Luck for me was being born into a low to MAYBE middle income family. Both my parents worked jobs in factories, until my dad was “disabled”. We were’nt poor, but we couldn’t do things like eat out at McDonalds. Part of that reason was my dad smoked 3-4 packs of cigarettes a day.

          My parents got divorced right after my freshman year of high school. And though my dad and I really didn’t have much of a relationship before, he had nothing to do with me after.
          I was fortunate (I guess you’d call it luck) that my mom had me involved in church my entire life. So there were some men I could look up to, since I didn’t have a dad at home. I was involved with the AWANA clubs as a kid, and involved with the HS group in church, while in HS.
          I was the class clown, and though my mom did the best she could to raise me, what I needed was a dad to set me straight, which I didn’t have. So I ALMOST didn’t graduate HS. I had no idea what I was going to do past HS and really didn’t care.
          Along comes my best friends dad, Walt.
          Walt calls me up one day, and says he’s taking his son to the community college 30 miles away, to check out the auto program there, and if I wanted to go with. I liked cars, and auto mechanics sounded cool. So I went.
          So I went to community college and took auto. In there I had to take a welding course. The first course, gas welding, was ok. It was recommended we take arc welding also. About half way through the course, it was like a lightbulb went on. And my welding skills started to grow. With each success I got hungrier and hungrier, and worked harder and harder. When I finished I had taken every welding course that was there. I was the best that had gone through there.
          The head instructor there recommended I go into welding engineering, but I was still to young and cocky. One of the other instructors hired me to weld in the factory he was a foreman at, pretty much of the recommendation of the head instructor and my reputation.
          By the way, I give credit to Walt for getting me into school when I had no idea or care what I was going to do after HS. But Walt didn’t pay for my eduction. My dad didn’t pay for my education. My mom couldn’t pay for my education, she didn’t even get child support from my dad. I went to school full time, and worked 30-40 hrs a week to put my self through school. Except during school breaks when I worked 50-60. I grabbed every hour I could.
          So what you call luck, I call hard work.

          You mention about not being in a vaccuum, and that my success was the outcome of others. True- TO AN EXTENT. It still took effort on my part to take advantage of opportunities that came my way. After that most opportunities that came my way were BECAUSE of things I did or decisions I made.

          Speaking of that vaccuum. My sophmore year in HS, while I was part of the church youth group, I also realized that I loved the AWANA programs at my church, and wanted to be a leader to younger kids, that they could enjoy AWANA like I had. I did that for 3 years in HS. I did it for 5 more years post HS (While I was going to college and working for 3 of those years).
          I left the church I grew up in, because they didn’t have much of a singles group, and started going to a larger church a few towns over. I got involved with the Jr High ministry there, and did that for 13 years. 13 years of 8:30- 12 or 1 on saturday mornings. 13 years of 2 weekend long retreats every year. 13 years of camp for 1 or 2 weeks.
          All because I wanted to plug into others, like I had been plugged into.
          So don’t talk to me about a “vaccuum”. I’m well aware of the “vaccuum”.

          There was one man who was more influential than Walt in my life. My grandfather Roy. He lived 300 miles away. He was a farmer, with just an 8th grade education. But as a kid I thought he could do anything. He never really showed me how to do certain things, he just did them. But the fact that he did them, as an impressionable child, I wanted to do them to. So as I grew older, I learned to do carpentry and plumbing and electrical and roofing and auto mechanics and welding and diesel mechanics. My grandfather lived to see me become a pipefitter. He remembered telling me not to watch the weld arc when he welded, when I was a kid. Then he told people that I was a certified welder welding in nuke plants and oil refineries.
          I developed most of the same skills my grandfather had. I just took them to the professional level. To craftsmanship.
          The BIGGEST skill my grandfather taught me? Work ethic. My grandfather was a bull. I’m bigger and stronger than he ever was, but I’d like to think I could have kept up with him. He’s been gone 17 years now, and I still wonder if I’d make him proud.
          Because of my grandfather, he also gave me the drive to help others. I can’t tell you how many roofs I’ve done, or how many times I’ve helped people move. How many times I’ve rewired rooms or wired lights or fans. How many bathrooms I’ve moved or remodeled. Or how many times I’ve been under a car or under the hood. How many trees of cut down. Decks that I’ve built. Rocks or dirt that I’ve hauled. All for the payment of cold pop or dinner.
          Heck, my mom yells at me-STILL, for dropping things to go help others.

          So now lets talk about double standards.
          You mentioned you went to a good 4 year college. I didn’t. And yet I’m as equally successful as you.

          Heres where the double standard kicks in. It doesn’t kick in because I make $150k and you make $66k.
          It kicks in back when we went to college (maybe even before that). We both went to school for our educations. We both got out and we both started at starting jobs. Its what happened after that where things change. I don’t know what you did. Frankly I don’t care. I do know that I continued to learn things. Continued to strive for EXCELLENCE. Worked as hard IF NOT HARDER than most around me. Its because of that that my income grew.

          Lets say you and I both have identical families. Identical education. And start with identical jobs making identical pay.
          If we both make $10 an hour and work 40 hour weeks, we get identical paychecks of $400. And we both get taxed the same.

          Now if I work 60 hours in a week I’ll get a check for $700.
          What you want, is that you pay one tax rate because you made $400 but demand that I pay another because I made $700, irrespective of the fact that I did more work than you.
          Even though by paying at the same rate, I’m paying more tax than you.

          Next, I continue learning and developing knowledge or skills, while you choose to do things the same. I get a raise of $2 an hour. Now I make $840 and even at the same tax rate I’m paying more tax than you, you demand even more from me, simply because I make more, because I’m working harder and smarter than you.
          I continue to get better educated, meanwhile your content to just do your job. I get a promotion to a new position because the education I got gave me better qualifications. The new position pays me $5 an hour more. Now I make $1140 a week and you demand I pay a higher tax rate.

          We both started out the same, but I chose to work harder and longer and get better or do more, and because of that you feel I should pay a higher tax rate.
          Thats a double standard.

          Here’s maybe a better scenario.
          You mentioned you went to a good college for 4 years.

          Lets compare you to a HS classmate.
          You both get good grades and go to the same college.
          You take Womens Studies, she takes finance and pre med.
          4 years later you both graduate.
          She goes on to med school, you go on to the working world. The problem, there’s no market of jobs for someone with a degree in Womens Studies, so you get a job at Home Depot.

          So now you’re in the working world, MAKING $12 an hour at Home Depot.
          Your friend is PAYING $40k a year to go to med school 4 more years.

          4 years later.
          You’ve gotten raises at Home Depot, and now make $15 an hour.
          Your friend finishes med school, and still hasn’t earned any money, because she’s been paying and going to school.

          Next.
          Still no jobs for Womens Studies major, so you keep working at Home Depot EARNING $15 an hour.
          Your friend continues on in education to become a specialist and surgeon.
          2 more years of going to school. 2 more years paying $40k a year. 2 more years of not working and earning a living.

          After those 2 years,
          You’ve worked your way up to the head of Windows, Doors and Cabinets department. Your making $20 an hour.
          Your friend FINALLY gets done with SCHOOL and becomes an intern. (Yeah, thats great pay) She works the graveyard shift and works 50-60 hours a week.
          You-you work 7am -3:30 go home and pop a few cold brewskis and complain about how hard your job is and how unfare.

          1 year later your friend finishes her internship.
          Your still the top dog in Windows, Doors and Cabinets at Home Depot.
          Still no jobs looking for Womens Studies majors.

          You friend starts her residency. Low man on the totem pole. Low pay and crappy hours and crappy cases. But she’s finally practicing medicine.

          5 years later.
          Your still Head of Windows, Doors and Cabinets, making $22 an hour.
          Your friend FINALLY finishes her residency and gets to go into private practice.
          With $500,000 in school loans.

          Now you work the same hours, 7 am -3:30 pm, 5 days a week.
          Your friend the Dr., works Monday 9 am-5:30-6pm,
          Tuesday is surgery day. Pre op starts at 5am. First patient at 5:30 or 6am. Surgeries are stacked one after the other. The last surgery ends around 8pm.
          Wednesday, back in the office at 1 pm til 6 pm. But before going into the office, there is checking up on all the patients from yesterdays surgery.
          Thursday, in the office from 10a-6p, and again checking on patients before AND after office hours.
          Friday in the office 10a -4 pm. And once again stopping in the hospital checking on patients, before and after office hours.

          Yeah, your Dr friend is still working 50-60 hours a week.

          You haven’t seen your friend in a number of years, so you go to a bar and have a couple. You complain about your job, your boss and the shitty pay you get, and the fact that there are no jobs for anybody with degrees in Womens Studies, and that Home Depot should pay you more for having that degree.

          And whats your Dr friend making her first few years in private practice??? Maybe $125-$150k, with a $500,000 student loan.

          5 years later.
          Your still at Home Depot. Complaining about your job. Complaining about your boss. Complaining about your pay.
          Complaining that a cabinet order got botched and some windows got broke, and how YOUR BOSS YELLED AT YOU.
          Your Dr friend is still working 60 hrs a week. Goes to seminars and lectures 1-2 weeks a year to keep up with the latest techniques and reads journals and trade papers.
          Oh yeah, she’s being sued because she didn’t notice something on a patient, that the other 2 drs she went to didn’t see either. And now complications arose.

          But hey, she’s making $300k (and still owes $350,000 on school loans)
          And she should be paying a higher percent in taxes than you, because she’s making more and was “luckier”

          Something you FAIL to understand about income. Not all jobs are equal. I don’t expect Drs to earn what a Walmart greeter does. What happens when a Walmart greeter makes a mistake? What about McDonalds hamburger flipper? Or the Home Depot employee?
          What do you think a CPA thinks about while he’s crunching numbers? Do you ever think a Dr worries about losing a patient on a table? Who’s got more responsibility, the Dr or the office manager.
          Like I said not all jobs are equal. And not all drs are equal. Some are better than others, because they work at it.

          In so many words, you’ve said that the wealthy OWE society, simply because they are wealthy.
          In reality, whether you admit it or not, what you’re saying is that the wealthy OWE-YOU.

          The wealthy owe society. YOU are part of society, ie, the wealthy owe you.

          It doesn’t matter what they’ve done to earn that money. It doesn’t matter the hours they’ve worked. It doesn’t matter how hard they’ve worked. It doesn’t matter the risk they’ve taken or endured. It doesn’t matter the responsibilities they have.

          They are wealthier than you, and they OWE-YOU!!!

          So I have a question for YOU.
          Since you feel that wealthy people should be held at a higher standard and do more, than less wealthy people. What are YOU- DOING to be to be at that same standard as the wealthy person? What are you doing to increase your income? What are you doing for your fellow man.

          You want to hold others up to a seperate standard. Its seems hypocritical to hold someone else to a standard that you yourself aren’t trying to or feel no obligation to obtain.

          If a wealthy person OWES something to society, what DO YOU OWE to society?

          I work 60 hours a week for my income. How about you?
          I’m taking classes. How about you?
          I’ve spent years volunteering for others. How about you?
          I’ve spent countless hours/days/weeks of my time helping others. How about you?

          Funny thing. You called me a conservative, like it was loathsome. I GLADLY admit I am.
          Funny thing. I hear people spout the same trash you do. Claim its FOR THE POOR, and yet DO NOTHING THEMSELVES.

          Repeated studies have been done on the giving of liberals vs conservatives. 2 things repeatedly occur. Conservatives GIVE more time and money to charities and people. And Liberals TALK more about people giving and doing more for others.

          Here’s a little secret about earning money maybe you haven’t figured out yet. The work comes before the money.
          That means, if somebody has more money than you now, somewhere along the line they probably worked harder, longer or smarter before you did.

  303. Ah, the hallmark of every republican. If I can do it, anyone can, because I am everyone, and everyone is me. ANYONE can get a $1,650/month job and then a supplemental income that pays 75% as much on top of it. Just “get” that income, as with a flick of the wrist. Anyone.

    1. Comrade, agreed. $1,600/month is what they are paying for unemployment benefits here in San Francisco, and $50/hour cash is what a group of 3 people pay me to teach them tennis at a public court.

      Fight on!

      1. you’re joking, right? you’re not truly unemployed? you honestly don’t know that unemployment benefits are based on previous salary? low wages= low unemployment benefits?

        and if you’re truly being paid under the table, then you’re a hypocrite on top of everything else. but at least tennis is a nice elitist sport – that fits

        whack! oops sorry did i hit you in the eye with that tennis ball? geez, do you have health care? no? why don’t use those $43 dollars you saved for monthly taxes and see a dr? stitches cost more? well, then you’ll just have to go out and get a third job. good luck with that.

        1. Recent College Graduate

          Now this, in a sense, is true. If you have low income, then a lower income shouldn’t really shock you. But unemployment tends to come in at half of what you are making. So, if you are making 14/hr and you are already strapped for cash, then that minimum wage pay that comes in from unemployment check is really going to be a slap to the face. I don’t think you’re really going to be able to make it work out all that well without adding something on top of it, which is technically illegal if you don’t report it =]

          Now.. If you make 80,000 a year, receive half of that through unemployment, and find yourself unable to manage your life, then I laugh at you. You’re obviously to used to living above your means and incapable of escaping your addictive, consumption based lifestyle, and that, good sir, is your own problem to fix =D

  304. @David Scott
    Not sure what you mean by unwilling to help your fellow man (at the end of your statement). Let’s be honest, the overwhelming majority of those earning the bottom 50% are NOT mentally handicapped, disabled, ect. And those at the poverty level? Studies confirm they have, across the board, some of those basics you would not expect “poverty” to provide – central air conditioning, automobiles, flat screen TV’s, cell phones, cable, ect. Where’s the poverty in that? And the hungry children? Same studies show over 90% of said “poverty-stricken” are able to feed and clothe themselves and their families – that’s over 90% of the poorest, not everyone mind you. There is a pervasive and ever-increasing downward spiral of the American mind leaning towards government hand-outs and “all things free”. The American work ethic is shrinking in ever-increasing numbers, which, of course, continues to contribute to the ever-widening gap of wealthy vs. poor. I get the feeling that Karl Marx is alive and well in the mind’s of today’s youth. If you’re making 33k a year, you’re simply lazy. NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. I can guarantee you that your parents and grandparents would not think twice about holding 2 or 3 jobs to double their income for their families. Today’s workforce somehow feels they are entitled to a comfortable 9-5 job that pays well and has benefits. Right now I have 2 full-time jobs and side-jobs for extra income and I’m a doc. If you don’t like your income and you’re not working 400 hours a month, you’re wasting my time with class discussions.

    1. @Eric Mims:
      Your statement that if you’re making 33K a year, you’re simply lazy is simply stupid. NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. Plenty of young college graduates just starting out are making that. They may be going to graduate school at night, or they may just be minding their own business, enjoying their lives. They’re paying income taxes and not on this blog arguing about class warfare. For you to make a blanket statement like that is ignorant Doc.

      1. Are we talking about recent college grads, or people who’ve been in the work force for a while with plenty of time to save and invest for their future?

        I thought college grads who don’t have work can just stay at home with their parents?

        1. Sam – your comment is totally irrelevant to what I am saying. All I am saying (to Eric Mims) is that his comment that “If you’re making 33k a year, you’re simply lazy. NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. ” is ignorant.
          NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.

      2. I accept your opinion, but the truth is everyone has the capacity to do more at that level of income and if you are complacent and happy with your 33k a year, you shouldn’t complain about it, you should do more. So, in essence, I’m not being ignorant, you just truly don’t want to accept the fact that there’s the capability and opportunity to do more and make more – not wanting to DO that does not make my statement ignorant, it just confirms laziness. And I reiterate my point, unless you’re working 100+ hours a week, you shouldn’t even be chiming with a rebuttal because arguing about income amongst the content 40hr/week lemmings means you’re still buying into the “I’m entitled” crowd. Sorry, that’s not my ignorance, I believe your’s is the head in the sand.

        1. @Eric – Maybe you are too busy working to notice that many people are doing more things with their lives besides just working 14 hours a day 7 days a week (15 hours on weekends). Education, volunteer work, sports, hobbies, caring for family, whatever… There is more to life than work, contrary to what many of you 100hr/week lemmings believe. If a young person can support himself and chooses to work only one job, how is this “entitlement”??? Who said anything about complaining???

          NYPD cops start out earning under 35K per year. Do you consider them lazy for not taking a side job at McDonalds??? I for one would rather not entrust the safety of the city to someone who barely gets enough sleep. (And no, I don’t think what you doctors do working 100 hours a week while training in hospitals is safe either…)

          Plenty of people who work 100 hr/week are just digging themselves an early grave. Sure, they have a beautiful home, but who cares? They are never home to see it! And parents of young children who work 100 hours a week may be making a lot of money but are failing at their parental role.

          I earn a little over 100K a year working 40 hours a week, and that is fine with me. I have a middle class home and life that I’m happy with. For you to claim that unless I am working 100 hours a week, I can’t make a rebuttal is absurd.

          YOURS is the head in the sand if alll you see in life is the bottom line.

    2. You’re certainly taking extremes to twist my thoughts. I didn’t say someone who only made 33k a year was lazy, I said someone that was content with 33k a year yet COMPLAINED about it was being lazy if they weren’t doing more. Cudos to NYPD. Ask how many cops do extra work to buff that income. Most DO, which means they are willing to do what it takes to provide a better life for their families than 33k provides. This is a pointless circle if you’re not seeing my argument. The host of the thread certainly did. My original point stands. There is an ever-growing balloon in America of the working class expecting more while doing less. The indigent care burden on this nation has mushroomed to staggering figures compared to the 1980’s. And yes, I agree that there are more things to do in life than work. However, the age where someone in the family took the burden on their shoulders to allow the rest of the family those LUXURIES, and please step out of the 100k/year mentality and realize that your sports, hobbies, volunteer work, ect., are LUXURIES, is rapidly fading away. You paint me the villain for the sacrifices I make when it has allowed my family to enjoy the very things you mention, somehow distilling my work down to frivolities such as a beautiful home, ect. It a classic tactic liberals apply when confronted with the reality of what used to be the standard family work ethic (farming aside). All I’m saying is, America has deteriorated into an ever-increasing “freeloader” society. You can argue with me, but you can’t argue the numbers of those living off my tax burden, a burden that would be far less onerous if the lion-share of fully capable beggars and panhandlers would be only left with the option that they work or they perish. Even the most destitute beggar during the Depression was more than eager and willing to actually work for his “handout”. Nowadays, their most difficult task is not tripping over the 360 cords while walking to the mailbox to get their monthly “due” from Uncle Sam. We as a nation would do well to learn to true reason Rome fell. The pathway we’re on is strikingly similar as the population relies more and more heavily on less and less that work to pay for them all.

      1. Reread your original post to see what you said. NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.
        I never heard of the 100K/year mentality. What exactly is that? I understand that you are insulting me, but I’m not sure what exactly you are insulting.
        You talk longingly of “the age where someone in the family took the burden on their shoulders to allow the rest of the family those LUXURIES”…. What age was that? I grew up in the Leave it to Beaver age…. we were a middle class family, with one car (only my Dad drove or went to work), one black and white TV, one bathroom. My sister and I shared a room. We went to public school, and eventually state University…. We didn’t have luxuries, but we did have the luxury of our Dad coming home EVERY day at 5:15. We ate dinner as a family, and both my parents were home at night. My parents were married over 50 years… THAT is the age that has faded…. that’s what a 40hr/week family looks like. Sure, if my Dad had taken on a second job, maybe we could have had more luxuries, but who needs luxuries compared to a happy family to spend time together?
        You people who speak derisively of 40hr/week workers have fallen into the ultra-materialism that has arisen in our society.
        Also – that tax burden you find so onerous would be a hell of a lot more in the 1980 Reagan years.
        And all these beggars and panhandlers you are seeing.. I’m not seeing them.. instead I am seeing hundreds of people applying for ONE job. Also, I am seeing the people at the top of corporations saving their companies $$ by outsourcing jobs overseas, meanwhile taking millions and millions of dollars in bonuses for themselves. Or by cutting jobs, trying to “do more with less” (aka try to get your salaried employees to work 100hr/week for free, and laughing all the way to the bank.) Those are the freeloaders I am seeing.

    3. Recent College Graduate

      Wow.. You really, truly do spew an insane amount of ignorance here.. First of all, if you are working more than 40 hours a week, then you either do not have a family of your own at all or you severely neglect any wife and/or kids that you do have (and they, with 99% certainty, WILL hate you for this for the rest of their lives). In fact, working at that rate.. Despite however much money you might bring in, you will be very likely to find a wife who is only with you for your money (what else do you have to offer when she never sees you?), infidelity on her part, children who feel as though they are bastards, and a likely divorce as soon as the wife can claim that she has become acclimated to this style of living and is deserving of 50% of everything you own =]

      Beyond this, I can tell you.. I am a recent graduate from Miami University (in Ohio). No, this is not a Harvard, Stanford, Cornell, Princeton, Dartmouth, or anything of that sort, but it is openly recognized as being one of the top 50 universities in the nation. I received a bachelor degree after completing two majors, Psychology and Sociology. No, these are not Business, Engineering, or Computer Science degrees, but they are respectable nonetheless. I was deeply involved in a few student organizations and involved in the leadership of two and the creation of one throughout my college career. I was also involved in research, and I worked full-time through all of my summers and 20 hours/week each of the school years while taking an average of 18-20 credit hours per semester. I graduated with Latin Honors: Cum Laude and a GPA of 3.67, which, in my opinion, is pretty good.

      While all of this admittedly might not have prepared me for many jobs that are available in today’s economy, I believe that it does show that I am driven, committed, and capable of learning. However, over the past 6 months (before and after graduating), I have applied for and either been completely ignored or denied from over 100 jobs. I will admit that I began applying for jobs that offer around 50k/yr in salary, but, over time, I learned to reduce my expectations significantly. I began to apply for jobs that pay only 25-30k/yr and would have been more than happy, but found that I was not wanted there either. In fact, I have even reduced myself to applying to places like Best Buy, local factories, Wal-Mart, Kroger etc. and have still found that there is no job to be had.

      Now, tell me, does this make me lazy? I can’t even receive unemployment, because I have not ever had any official employment that was not ended on my own volition. Where am I supposed to be working these two jobs when I can’t even find one? I can’t even find a place that will give me part-time work, much less those 40 hours. Even when I was working full-time over my summers, I was still only getting 30-35 hours in a week, and I’m supposed to be working more than 40 hours a week now? I would honestly prefer a job that pays me 35k to work 40 hours in a week, because I actually do have friends and a life…

      So.. Again. Where are these two jobs coming from? Are you going to hire me? If anyone on here wants to hire me, then I will gladly relocate to wherever it is that you need me to be =D But.. I don’t see that one happening. All I see is people saying that the rich create jobs. I don’t see any of them actually doing it. And, by the way.. It’s obvious that many of you on here are rich. Just saying…

      1. I’m not going to hire you because 1) You want to Miami, and it’s not even in Florida. Why would you go to Miami Ohio when you could go to Harvard? 2) You come across as entitled, 3) You find working more than 40 hours a week is too much, which is a serious problem and why other people won’t hire you, 4) You are derisive for your comments about divorce, 5) You got a 3.67 GPA which doesn’t meet the cut off of many top firms at 3.8 , and 6) Although Latin Honors is nice, you haven’t shown me you’ve taken any initiative to learn other things that might help you.

        I’m glad you are at least trying to apply for jobs at Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc. Keep on going and don’t give up. I won’t hire you, but maybe someone else will. Maybe you can start your own business too.

        1. Recent College Graduate

          First, FS, if it makes you feel any better, my post on here was not necessarily a direct reply to anything that you said. I believe it was actually directed to Eric Mims, if I recall correctly.

          Now, to address your response to what I said.

          1) I wish I could have went to Harvard, but that wouldn’t have been the easiest thing in the world, coming from a working class family and a (very) mediocre high school. I didn’t even know college was an option for me until my senior year. Yes, that was how ignorant my family and my high school was about what a student can and cannot do without having money directly in their pocket. I made the college thing happen on my own =D I found out about the options that I had in terms of scholarships and grants etc, and I made them work out to get me through the best school I could get into on such late notice. By the way, I was also accepted into Michigan State University, but I didn’t understand the aid process well enough to know that I would have went there for free until after being at Miami for a few weeks.

          2) I feel like I should be entitled to a studio apartment, some food, gas to put in my car that I already own (paid off myself), and some clothes on my back at the least. Should all humans be entitled to this? Probably… But I certainly feel like I should be able to, considering that I will be feeding thirty grand to our banks over the next several years, and I did what everyone says to do. I went to college and finished, and what awaits me in the real world? I can’t even get jobs that I could get if I did not have my degrees. And, to be frank, I don’t really want to work for minimum wage along with kids who are still in high school, lol.

          3) I never said that I would not work 40 hours or more in a week. I likely committed more time than this throughout several of my weeks in college, and I certainly pulled off plenty of all-nighters, as well as any other discomfort you would expect to come along with a decent college experience. I was simply saying that, if I had a family of my own, I would focus more on them than my work. Americans seem to have lost what is really important in life these days. Why do you work for the money you get anyway? To make your family happy.. Do you really think that they are happier with the money than they would be with having quality time to spend with you? I doubt it. And, if they are, then, I’m sorry, but you chose the wrong family.

          4) As I said before, the post wasn’t directed at you. There are several ways that workaholics could balance work with family. The best way, in my opinion, is to have work that you can include your family in, but a lot of people do not do this. Speaking in a broader sense, my statement was dead on =D Can you give a better explanation as to why 50% of today’s families are ending in divorce? And let’s not fool ourselves.. There is certainly another 25% that wear that facade of happiness, particularly in the middle and upper classes, simply because they feel that they have some reputation to maintain.

          5) I would say a top firm would certainly pay more than the 25-30 k that I said would be willing to work for. Perhaps I was applying for positions in what you would consider to be top firm material in the beginning of my process, but, as I said, I quickly lowered my standards. I would think a 3.67 would be fitting for a more middle of the pack firm where I could prove myself through my personal talents and work ethic to move into the top firms in the future, if I should choose to do so.

          6) Yeah. You got me on this one, but I didn’t send you my resume or anything, lol. I really didn’t learn too much other than the ability to think and learn for myself in college, which I personally believe is one of the most important qualities for any individual to have. However, some things that you might actually find to be valuable in the world of business..

          While I was a Psychology and Sociology major, I am capable of doing much more than that in life. Those were simply the subjects that most interested me. I was also the Financial Director of a student organization at Miami, so I had to manage our funds through allocating them to the appropriate parties in good time, ensure that we had enough funding available to do whatever it was that we wanted to do as an organization, and apply for grants from local and national businesses in order to fund our presentations, events etc. In doing research, I was also to develop a fairly in depth knowledge of statistics and a couple of software programs that are designed to perform statistical determinations (mostly SPSS). Beyond this, I was also involved in a competition in which an interdisciplinary (based on major) group of students were required to produce a new technological idea that would somehow serve the campus. Needless to say, I didn’t have much to do with the technological development itself, but I did help to construct surveys to gauge the need and interest levels for our product, and I also helped with the advertising of the product.

          By the way, I did read your other post, and I hope this helped to clear up some things that were brought up on there.

          Oh.. and, I actually am a guy, just to let you know. I just have an understanding of the world through multiple perspectives (which, by the way, could be very helpful to any company), so I can understand why you might believe that I was a woman after some of my comments in the previous post.

          And, if it makes things seem any more fitting, I tend to be the kind of guy that business people like you hate =] I was never really looking to be a lawyer or a walking, talking suit in some big business. I did apply for several jobs along those lines in the beginning, because I felt that I had to. But I have more recently been looking into certain non-profit jobs. I’m not all that big into the idea of government work either.. Unless it has to be done. And just to let you know, my rhetoric and my attitude receives a much better response from those on the other side of the ball =D I haven’t landed a job quite yet, but I’m getting much closer, and it will be in doing something that I will enjoy much more. Win-win situation there, right?

          1. Thanks for the clarification! I hope you’ve found some of the feed back useful in the comments. I tried to be as objective as possible in the words I used around your comment.

            My best advice is to embrace feedback and tweak your attitude towards the suggestions given. Employers want the hungriest, friendliest, and frankly cheapest people to work with them as possible. It’s up to you to make a decision.

      2. Hey College Grad, I feel your frustration. This is not a good time to be looking for a job. Things will change, though, eventually. In the meantime, the holidays are coming, and the stores will be hiring temporary help. You may very well be able to get a temp job in a store (if you’re lucky, you can get a job in a store you or your family likes because you’ll probably get a pretty nice discount). If you do well there, and are a hard worker, they sometimes hire permanent workers from their holiday help. Anyway, it’s a way to make some money while looking for something else.

        Another thing which I would recommend f you haven’t done so is to get a volunteer job. Check out http://www.volunteermatch.org, and try to find something that really appeals to you, It could be a stepping stone to a paying job. Also, it’s a good way to meet people. (Networking is the best way to find a job.)

        Good luck!!

  305. I worked for corporate america for 24 years and got let go as a commissioned rep because I sold too much and made too much commission. The major corp was taken over by a Canadian corp who quickly filed for bankruptcy. NO severance after 7 years of hard labor and millions in sales. I was unemployed for 2.5 years and collected unemployment and did not default on my mortgage. I hated being on the doll. SO I sold my house, started my own company and will make be in top 3.5% this year-Total commission. I made $22,000 last year on handouts/unemployment. My point is this is the land of opportunity! This is the greatest country on earth based on a free market society not a socialist country. Quit your complaining pull yourself up and seize the day! What sense does taxing the producers vs non producers make? If you do not like the way America is set up leave! Keep the faith!

    1. Good story Gerry.

      Maybe it’s because it’s easier to stay drunk on the beautiful ever flowing fountain of gifts from the government? It’d be a hard habit to kick once you start getting the $1,600/month. I know I’d have a hard time.

      1. $1,600 a month sounds great to you? You must know nothing about paying bills. After rent, car payment, car ins, and gasoline, there would hardly be anything left to buy food. And you don’t seem to know that employers pay towards unemployment benefits, and I can bet they adjust employees wages to to make up for this. That is probably part of the reason that middle class wages have been flat for the lat 30 years.

        1. Why would have a car, car insurance, and gas expenses? You might want to rethink your entitlements and why you are struggling if you think you can afford a car if you making under $33,000.

          Follow my 1/10 rule of car buying, which states that you should not spend more than 1/10 of your annual income on the purchase price of a car.

          People who make $200,000 can buy $20,000 cars, not people making less!

        2. Sam – many people need a car to get to work. Some areas have great public transportation at all times of day, but many places don’t. Depending on when and where you work, public transportation may not be safe, even if available.

        3. 30 years ago was 1981. I was in my second year of community college and working at a hot dog stand for $5.25 an hour.

          1983 I finished (for the most part) my schooling in auto mechanics and welding. Got my first welding job making $7 an hour

          1985 got a different welding job making $9 an hour + overtime.

          1987 got a different welding job starting at $10 an hour + overtime
          left 1 year later making $12 an hour + overtime.

          1988 quit a job making $12 an hour + overtime, to start an apprenticeship in the building trades making $5.50 an hour with very seldom any overtime.

          I know make OVER $100k because I work OVERTIME.

          6 years ago things were very slow. Went looking for a welding job to make ends meet. The place I left in ’88 was still paying the same in 2005.
          I went to work for a different company, through Man Power. Paying me $15 an hour.
          They bought my contract through Man Power out after 1 week, because in that time I was matching output of a guy who had been there 13 years. They increased my pay to $20 an hour + over time, with garauntees of more $$ in the future as I’d prove more that my skills were what I said they were. My skills were/are beyond anything they could have ever used.

          I went back to the building trades when the opportunity arose.

          The point being. Yes wages HAVE held relatively flat.
          The job I left 23 years ago, still pays about the same as it did when I left.

          The difference is me.
          That job hasn’t changed.
          I have.

      2. zeus omally

        Yeah, 1600 a month in unemployment in SanFran is awesome! Let’s see, what a month in SanFran might cost a young person:

        Rent in SanFran: $700(very basic, very small)
        Food in SanFran: $300
        Transportation
        (gas, car repair,
        car payment, bus
        tickets): $75
        Phone Bill: $60
        Electric: $90
        Garbage $30
        Water: $45
        Clothing: $25
        Medicine/hygiene $30
        catfood $10
        ONE night out
        to a restaurant
        with friends $20
        One movie
        out with friends $15
        basic home upkeep
        (fix laundry machine,
        plumber bill, replace
        fridgerator etc.) $25(averaged out. Some months less, others, much more!)
        medical insurance: $175…oh, oops, looks like we can’t afford that! Better hope you don’t
        fall down the steps you dirty leech! Now get off your butt and try to find an opening at McDonalds for $10 an hour($1600 a month!).

  306. If you really look at the numbers the bottom 50% of earners who pay 2.7% of the total tax burden only have a total income of 4.6% of all dollars earned in the US. I don’t think anyone should complain about that unless you are willing to try to live and pay bills on less than 33K per year. And yes, the great blessings that the wealthy in our country have should actually compel them to desire paying more taxes to help keep our country in one piece.

      1. The bottom 50%’s group share of the number of sons and daughters sent to fight and die in needless wars is close to 100%. Don’t you think the top 2%, who own 40% of the real wealth of this nation should invest 40% their children as cannon fodder for the wars that enrich their portfolios? Wars they often bang the drums for.

        The top 400 families hold as much wealth as the bottom 150,000,000 combined. How many of those 400 families have lost a child in Iraq or Afghanistan? How many of the 58,000+ people etched in the Vietnam Wall came from those families? Answer to previous two questions – Zero

        Until the uber rich begin to share in the ‘ultimate sacrifice’, your calls for shared sacrifice and equality ring hollow.

        1. I agree with your statement. There is a disproportionate amount of people in the bottom 50% who have fought our wars to provide us freedom. Hence, those who are veterans and first generation relatives of veterans should get everything and more.

          They shouldn’t have to fight for a good job and benefits back home!

  307. If the so called job creators can’t be taxed more in fear that jobs won’t be created then they have a responsibility to either create jobs (which in turn will create more taxpayers and more consumers) or pay more more in taxes.

      1. Not true…. it’s the Republicans who are constantly talking about the “job creators”… How about giving a tax break to those who actually DO create jobs and not just those who MIGHT create jobs?

        1. Business isn’t about creating jobs. That line of thinking only comes from those who want others to carry their water.

          Business is about making money.
          That means if hiring more people will make it more money, then they will hire more people.
          If a company makes more money, more taxes are paid.
          Its that simple.

          If you want more tax revenue, get out of the way of business, and let them make more money. They make more money, they hire more people. More people who work receive less welfare and pay more taxes.

          Less welfare means less government spending.
          Less government spending and higher tax revenues mean lower deficits and finally surpluses.

          Would you rather have 15% of $10 million or 25% of $5 million?

        2. @Mountn_Man – Our economy isn’t all about taxes. It’s also about JOBS…. AMERICAN JOBS. Maybe I should stated my previous comment a little differently: “How about giving a tax break to those who actually DO create jobs and not just those who MIGHT create AMERICAN jobs?”

          You are right that business is all about making money. And too many businesses are finding they can make a larger profit by outsourcing work to foreign countries like India. So, instead of paying someone here, say $50/hour, they can pay someone, say $15/hour in India.

          I would rather that the government receive 15% of whatever profit a company hiring American workers makes, and on top of that, taxation on the wages of the American people that company employs. More people who work receive less welfare and pay more taxes, as you said.

          If the company prefers to make more money by outsourcing jobs to India…. FINE. Then let them pay 25% of their larger profit.

          Again, as you say, it’s that simple.

  308. “I remember making $550 a month just working at McDonald’s for $3.50/hour, 20 years ago. With wages 3X higher now, I’d be raking in a nice $$1,650 a month or $20,000 a year! Tack on another side job that pays $1,200 a month and I’m in the Top 50%. Anybody can do it!”

    Tack on a side job that pays nearly as much as your full time job? Good luck buddy.

      1. You clearly do not have children. Who picks them up from school (at 2pm, since our schools haven’t caught up with the fact that people can’t afford to have one parent stay home anymore). Those is the higher brackets pay their nanny, chauffeur to pick up the kids. They could even pay someone to work that extra job because that mcdonal working single mom sure isn’t going to be able to do that unless she’s lucky enough to be able to rely on family, friends, and neighbors. Not many of us have that luxury.

        I dont’ know who you are or why I ended up on this post and I’ve never even commented on on a stranger’s post before, but you are a deeply misguided if not utterly cold-hearted person. I take great offense at everything you’ve written, your tone and your glib sarcasm. People are out there every day working and yes, paying taxes! who cannot afford food, healthcare or decent living conditions. And you tell them to work two jobs and move to San Francisco? I live in San Francisco, and if I forget to move my car on trash night I get a $65 ticket. Then if I have to choose between paying it and buying groceries it grows to $110 and more…Being poor is expensive, have you seriously no idea? $43/month may be Blue Bottle coffee for you, for others it’s the medication that keeps them alive. Read Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Nickle and Dimed” someday if you really want to say you understand being a low-income wage earner. Good uck with that karma.

        1. Bad karma happens when you wish bad on others. So, I say to you good luck.

          You shouldn’t discriminate against the poor. The poor just want a chance to succeed. Dissemination is horrible, and you might as well be living in the 1960’s.

  309. Wow. So in your fantasy land, the poor are doing better than Warren Buffet. Great argument there.

    And your answer to the poor is to work two full-time jobs, so that they can survive. That to you is better than millionaires paying a slightly higher marginal tax rate. And not only is this right-wing/conservative/tp/Republinut ‘logic’ deplorable and wrong, it doesn’t take into account all the other taxes, some of which are paid at a higher rate by the lower and middle-class.

    You also don’t take into account total financial wealth. The top 5% in the US control 72% of all the financial wealth in the US. The top 10% control 83%. And that was in 2008, they likely control more now. By contrast, the bottom 80% controls just 7% of all US financial wealth!

    It seems you want to compare our poor with the truly desperate and starving. And that in your mind, the poor in America should pay more taxes until they are truly desperate. That only when they become comparable to the poor in the worst nations on earth, only then can they claim they are poor. Is that right? Or at that point would you simply call them whiners and lazy? which is essentially what you do here.

    1. Why do you belittle the poor and those making under 33k a year? You will be surprised with how much strength we have and how much we do care about the country and happy to contribute.

      I’m a firm believer that Obama will get reelected in 2012, because All of America wants to help out and contribute more, not just the wealthy would already contribute the most.

      1. Nowhere do I belittle the poor. And you didn’t address a single point in my post. But I suppose that’s typical of the right-wing. If you can’t speak to the issues at hand, deflect and change the subject… or speak in rhetorical whimsy.

        1. Nice. If you want to disregard my points and direct me to your tongue in cheek socialism post, fine. But as is typical of those on the right, you use lazy arguments, slanted stats and hyperbole to misrepresent the truth.

          The funny part is, I think you know, intellectually, that some of that socialism post is true. For instance, I think you actually do believe that some form of universal health care should be given to all Americans. But you couch that in the rest of the socialism post, which is clearly tongue-in-cheek.

          So go on, keep calling people comrade and misrepresenting the views of those on the left. Most on the right no longer care about the truth anyway, so I imagine most of your readers wouldn’t believe you anyway, if you told them honestly that the left-wing (or at least the vast majority of us) has no interest in ‘shaking the rich for all their worth to provide for the rest of us’. We simply believe that the marginal rates of the Clinton years or Reagan years were far more conducive to a more prosperous and just society.

  310. Great information! I’ll use this to battle my liberal friends who want to make wealthy people pay even more than the outrageous amounts they pay already. Is the income information for individuals, households, or just overall returns? Thanks.

    1. Where exactly are you getting from these figures that wealthy people pay “outrageous amounts”? I see these figures as just the opposite – that despite the rhetoric that the top 1% pay 38% of the total tax bill, that is NOT an outrageous amount when you see what % of total earnings and wealth they control.

      1. “NOT an outrageous amount when you see what % of total earnings”

        Looking at % of total earnings is precisely why I feel it is outrageous. They make 20% of total earnings but pay 38% of total taxes. If they paid 20% it would not be outrageous. But they pay nearly double that.

        1. So you believe in the flat tax. The top 1% would pay 20% of total taxes if we had a flat tax rather than the progressive income tax system we have. But the United States has NEVER had a flat tax. This is nothing new. The top earners were paying a much higher marginal tax rate during the Reagan years than they are now. The top marginal tax rate is historically very low now.
          I don’t think these numbers are going to impress your liberal friends very much, but I applaud you for trying to give the full picture rather than what the right-wing pundits usually like to do….. just say the top 1% pays 38% of the tax bill without also disclosing how much income/wealth they control.

        2. I don’t necessarily believe in the flat tax because it would further cripple the economy, but I do think that a flat tax would be the most fair method of taxation. I’m OK with the progressive system but when is enough enough? The rich already pay more than their “fair share” in the progressive system, and now that we’re in a huge hole, we want to make them pay even more? When does it end? They’re already giving their fair share. Get the revenue elsewhere. I’m far from rich but I just don’t think what we’re trying to do is fair.

  311. point 7. NO free HEALTH CARE FOR any politician EVER. Make them pay for there own insurance. We will have socialized mediine in by the next election. Run on that platform. You got my VOTE!

  312. The American President 1995
    QUOTE: “People don’t drink the sand because they’re thirsty. They drink the sand because they don’t know the difference.”

    Point 1. Taxing the top 25% Federal income brackets is a DEM tactic to get votes. Scare the bottom half of the TAX tax bracket to vote for “woe is me”. The have nots will always want to take from the haves and complain that the system keeps them down. Why should 1 in 4 amercian’s pay for people “who in majority make less effort to contribute to society.” The problem is people use to have pride and where humble. Now today the people thinks its a right to have CABLE, Cell phone, Internet, Job, 9 kids, marring an illegal, 4 car’s, beer, sigs, going out to eat.

    Point 2. You can tax the top 10% income earner’s to 70%. And the Dem’s will scream we need more money to balance the budget tax them more. It will create more program’s that the masses will abuse.

    Point 3. Education cost for public schools/ trade/ and college need to be capped or should be free to students with 3.0 or higher. Coaches, School staffs, teachers (yes teachers), do not deserve to make $500k a year to do there job.

    Point 4. Controll the cost meds & health insurance. No drug company needs to fleece amercia for billions. Controll the cost meds & medical services, and competition in insurance market will lower rates.

    Point 5. No unsecured loans! Simple – verify with IRS a actual copy tax forms, not what the person/ business brings into the office. In accurate evaluation of property value’s should be held accoutnable.

    Point 6. KILL N.A.F.T.A. Clinton & Dem “con”gressianal gift to job sucking america. It allowed america to move manufacturing over seas and stopped many import taxes.

    Quote: The dems

    1. 1.) Where do you get that we are only taxing the top 25%??? Only 1 in 4 Americans pay taxes? Or are they the only ones who you consider to be making an effort to contribute to society? Many people in lower-paying jobs (e.g. Social Worker) make a much bigger effort (as well as results) to contribute to society than many people in high paying jobs…
      (Oh, I get it… YOU are in the top 25%!)

      2.) Are you serious? “The masses”???? You are really an elitist, aren’t you?

      3.) What teacher do you know that makes 500K, or anywhere near that????

  313. Like all too many analyses this one focuses exclusively on income taxes which are our only significant progressive taxes and especially on federal income taxes only which represent a little over a quarter of all tax receipts (state, federal, and local). Payroll taxes, sales, fees, etc are either flat or regressive, which all averages out to a total tax system which is almost flat from the 25th though the 99th percentile, with steep dropoffs at the bottom and the very very top (mostly due to capital gains rates).

  314. Lindz Sangalli

    If all the top earners pay 100% you still wouldn’t get rid of the national debt. Why not have a flat tax? Do you want to pay more for a loaf of bread or twice the electric rate just because you make twice as much as your neighbor? How much is enough? Just because you make more money doesn’t mean you have more to keep at the end of the month. If you have a bigger house, you might have a bigger mortgage payment, your electric bill is higher, your water bill is higher and with it comes you…r lawn guy, your pool guy, your housekeepers, your nannies,your insurance, your car payments (if you finance all) add up to higher bills. Don’t forget that often someone making 1 million a year,already is giving back beyond their income tax contributions. They give back every time they hire someone to do something for them. Go drive around some of the Big & Rich areas of Dallas, Bev Hills, New Port Beach, Man.Bch.CA, NYC and the like. If you think all those people are socking away all the money the make, well I have a bridge to sell you. Some of the million dollars paychecks have more going out than coming in. Many million dollar check makers also are investing in business’s with their income. Business’s that will provide jobs for others. All the people listed above that provide services make a living from those who make enough money to hire them to do it. Don’t hate those who make a lot of money.. many of them help put food on the table for many American families. Take more money from those who pay most of the money already and you may find that all you are doing is “Cutting off the nose to spite the face”. You’ll see.. just like NY did.. raise taxes and watch how many people move away and fill out the Monaco Citizenship application.

    1. It’s really not like paying more for a loaf of bread than my neighbor. We would both pay the same amount for the first loaf of bread. I would pay a higher price for the second loaf (that my neighbor can’t afford to buy).
      People are saying that we hate those who make a lot of money… that is not true. But if we need to create more revenue by raising taxes, the author of this blog thinks we should do so by raising taxes on the poorest among us. I just think it more reasonable to raise them on those who could most afford it, rather than on those who can least afford it.

    2. If people want to move to another country because their taxes are too high, I say good luck and send us a post card once in a while. It is so stupid and petty, when you hear people like Bill O’Reily say that if his taxes are raised he would quit his $10 million a year job at Fox, and people who work for him would lose their jobs. If his income taxes go up, he would only have $5 million a year left. A bottom 50% worker would have to work over 150 years to make $5 million.

      I cannot believe these people who make a ton of money who whine and cry about how much they pay in taxes. Why don’t they just think of the ton of money they have left after taxes.

        1. If Bill O’Reilly quits his $10 million per year job, there will be lots of talented people lining up to take his place, and the people that work for him will just get a new boss!

          Samurai – one of your misapprehensions is that you equate earnings with how hard a person works. Assuming you make about 500K per year, do you think Bill O’Reilly works 20x harder than you do? And that the teachers that taught you work 10% as hard as you do? It’s not that simple. We need all kinds of people in all kinds of jobs in our society, not just corporate bigwigs. Your constant belittling of people in lower-paying jobs is truly demeaning.

      1. OK, so let’s pick a number and tax 100% over that number. If $5 million is enough, shouldn’t $2.5 million really good enough? And seriously, if $2.5 million is enough, couldn’t he get by with $1.25 million? Let’s not stop there though, please tell me how much is enough and let’s keep on going. I live comfortably on $100K so that really should be the max anyone needs to make. Let’s tax all income at 100% over $100K and world will be a better place, no doubt.

        1. Jakee, no one is suggesting the highest tax bracket should be at a rate anywhere near 100%. We have always had a progressive tax system, and the highest marginal tax rate has been as high as 91%. It is only 35% now. (For capital gains, the rate is only 15%, no matter how much they make.) Everyone agrees the deficit is a big problem and that something needs to be done. Creating a new marginal tax bracket with a higher rate for income over a million would be a start. What would you suggest?

    3. State of Reason

      Lindz Sangalli, I don’t want to nitpick but your first sentence is blatantly false and is proven false by the chart in the original post. You said “If all the top earners pay 100% you still wouldn’t get rid of the national debt.” The entire Federal budget is under $4 trillion and the deficit is just over $1 trillion. Based on the chart provided in this post the top 1% of income earners alone report income of $1.7 trillion and currently pay $.4 trillion in taxes. So, if we increased their taxes to 100% then that would fully cover the deficit. BTW, I’m not suggesting we increase taxes to 100%, just correcting your statement.

      From 1936 to 1986 top tax rates were over 70%, peaking over 90% from 1950-1963. During that period our country experienced consistent substantial growth. In the 80’s taxes on the wealthiest were reduced to 50% and the number of people taxed in the top tier was dramatically reduced. Ever since then we’ve seen a substantial decline in the middle class. Our GDP has only continued to grow due to the dramatic increase in income of the top 10%. You might also note that the last time taxes on the wealthy were as low as they are today was just before the great depression.

      Now I’m not saying that this proves that taxes on the wealthy inherently create growth. There’s clearly a lot more to it and this data is insufficient to prove that. What it does clearly prove is that higher taxes on the wealthy do not hurt growth.
      https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

      1. COMMON Sense

        Actually, Lindz’s statement is correct – “If all the top earners pay 100% you still wouldn’t get rid of the national debt.” Lindz stated “debt” — currently over $14.8T — not “deficit”. Our debt is a huge problem. Just addressing the current annual deficit does nothing to address that debt. Raising some taxes will likely have to be done because our politicians have done the equivalent of buying a car they didn’t need and expect us to pay for it. I would rather they didn’t buy the car in the first place, and would prefer they not to buy another one they don’t need. Figuratively speaking, of course. The “tax the rich” solution naively ignores that a huge chunk of money goes toward paying debt interest alone ($400B+ per year) without even addressing the principal of those loans. Cutting out-of-control spending is crucial to attacking the debt. You are correct in stating that raising taxes to 100% would cover the deficit, but deficit reduction is meaningless by itself. Come up with a solution to tackle the debt. Not to nitpick.

        1. State of Reason

          COMMON Sense, how exactly do you address the debt without addressing the deficit. The only way to possibly address the debt is to address the deficit. The deficit is the short term version, the debt is the long term version. We need to fix the deficit so that we have money to put towards the debt.

          If you eliminate the deficit and create a surplus you can start paying down the debt. That is, of course, if we don’t end up with another Bush style president who comes into office saying “it’s not the government’s money it’s yours” and immediately gives up the surplus and plunges us back into deficit spending. Eliminating the deficit would, over time, pay off the debt.

          Also, there is no plan whatsoever that could possibly pay off the entire debt immediately. You could raise everyone’s taxes to 100% and eliminate 100% of government spending and still not pay off the entire debt that year.

          Finally, the “tax the rich solution” is not a solution. It’s a part of a solution. There is no real solution that doesn’t include both spending cuts and tax increases. The reason the wealthy are the primary “target” of tax increase talks is that 1) they can afford it and 2) they have seen the largest tax cuts over the last 30 years, going from 80% at the beginning of Reagan’s first term to just over 30% now.

        2. COMMON Sense

          At no time did I say that you shouldn’t address the deficit — I stated that “deficit reduction is meaningless by itself”, indicating you have to address debt and deficit. Also, at no time did I ever say that the debt can be handled in one year. I was simply correcting your statement that Lindz was “blatantly false” when you ignored or misread what was actually written there — pay more attention to what is actually written. Stating something is blatantly false then misquoting the statement is just funny. I think you need to read more carefully and not assume that Lindz and I are saying something that we are not.

          This whole thread, though, indicates that deficit is all you should address, and then only by raising taxes. “Eliminating the deficit would, over time, pay off the debt” is not entirely accurate as you state above. Mathematically, if you have a $1T deficit and you increase taxes enough to cover exactly $1T, you have successfully balanced the budget for that year, very simply. However, you still have $14T in debt that you did nothing to affect. You do allude to that in your above statement about surplus, so I think you get that. But, the interest on those loans will continue to accrue, so while you’ve successfully balanced for this year, without doing something else you will again be in deficit next year with the added interest. Eliminating the debt and creating a surplus are two different things. If you stop at eliminating the debt, you can never pay off debt. Creating a surplus is how you pay off the debt, and you can only do that in a significant way with the amounts we’re talking about by doing both raising taxes (because we’ve been forced into that scenario) and cutting out of control spending, which you state above. This whole thread ignores the importance and effect of cutting spending, though, and indicates that increasing taxes on the rich will solve all ills.

          The whole point of the opposition to raising taxes is that given the scenario that we are in, you will never get to a point to where the amount you’ve raised taxes is sufficient or “just” as many on the left would say, especially with the current administration’s appetite to increase spending at a catastrophic rate. You will then want to increase the rates again or lower the bar for defining the cutoff line of the rich you want to tax while failing to understand that increasing taxes on the rich does affect the plight of the middle and lower classes.

          The rich have gotten tax cuts over the last 30 years is because the philosophical intent of the founding of our country was property ownership, including money, if done legally and honestly. Until you clean up the abuse by the some recipients of handouts they receive as well as abuse by some providers and government, you cannot come up with a system that will fairly tackle our fiscal challenges. Increasing taxes on the rich facilitates continued abuse by both rich and poor in the name of “fairness”. Unfortunately, this approach tries to address the rights of one group by infringing on the rights of another group. That is just wrong in our country.

        3. COMMON Sense

          “If you stop at eliminating the debt, you can never pay off debt.” Meant to write “If you stop at eliminating the *deficit*, you can never pay off debt.”

  315. Complaining that the top 20% pay 80% of the taxes (a frequent complaint) – when they indeed earn about 60% of the income … is sort of like suggesting that skewing the income tax rates towards high income earners is unfair. Sort of like saying the bottom 50% ought to pay their fair share…

    Do you think it would be more fair to ask the bottom 50% to pay 50% of the income tax? That is about the same logic that drives your complaint about the tax burden placed on the top earners.

    That would be fair, right? Half the population pays half the tax.

    The folks earning only 12.75% of total income ought to pay 50% of the taxes, right?

    C’mon folks…saying “top 20% pay 80% of the taxes” is an unfair representation.

    It is interesting that the “burden” placed on a top earner means that a person earning $380,000 per year pays an effective tax rate of 23%, and I’ll bet a person at the next tier down is paying pretty darn close to that (20%) yet earns less than half as much per year ($160,000 per year…).

    1. Uh, if the top 20% earn 60% of income why are they paying 80% of taxes? Come on now. They should pay 60% of taxes. Always think math and equality. Why would you tax them more?

      1. because when you make that much more it is rarely because you are really creating that much more value, but rather found a way to exploit the working poor?

        Also the rich use far more government services and infrastructure to keep their businesses going…

        1. “Also the rich use far more government services and infrastructure to keep their businesses going…”

          REALLY???

          Government spends ON AVERAGE just under $11,000 per student per year on education.
          How many families do you know that pay $11,000 in federal and/or state income taxes, that would cover their portion of just one childs education, let alone 2 or more??? And thats JUST for education. Let alone defense and infrastructure and others. If families aren’t even paying their portion on education, then they are’nt paying their portion on the rest.
          That money has to be coming from somewhere. Either the poor are paying for the services they use or the rich are paying for the services that they use. Seeing that the bottom of the top 25% make about $67,000, that means $67,000 AGI is the top of the bottom 75%. when you figure how much tax even the very top of the bottom 75% pay, that doesn’t cover education expenses. If the the top of the bottom isn’t covering even their portion, that must mean the the top 25% are paying all the rest, PLUS THEIRS TOO.

    2. Thank you for bringing that point up. It infuriates me when people spew out those percentages that in no way represent the actual percentage of taxes paid in relation to income earned. Those numbers are meant to overdramatize the tax burden of the top earners. Another assumption that is made is that the bottom 50% of wage earners are full time workers or heads of households, when in reality it is not specified, just that they are income earners which would then include for part time workers, students, seniors who have income to report, disabled workers who are in work programs, etc. I know of parents who have their daughters file income taxes on their babysitting pay to teach them the right thing to do. These are many of the people who constitute the bottom 50%. I doubt that most of the spouses, children or disabled family members in the wealthier families need to take minimum paying jobs to make ends meet so they are not even considered in the equation as wage earners or tax payers, while there are many more wage earners in poor families therefore what the top/bottom 50% of wage earners actually represents needs to be clarified.

  316. State of Reason

    So, you’re proposing filling $60billion of our deficit with a 2.5% increase of taxes on people in the bottom 50%. You want to double taxes on people who, in many cases are having trouble feeding their family or keeping a roof over their heads. I accept your proposal. Let’s double the taxes the poor are paying on one condition. That we double the taxes the rich are paying. That seems totally fair. It does seem curious to me that you were only planning on doubling the taxes of the poorest people in the country.

    You question whether we should call people making $200,000/ year wealthy. The average income in our country is around $46,000. If people making more than 4 times the average shouldn’t be considered wealthy please tell me where you would draw the line.

    You said: “Ironically, it’s during downturns where the less wealthy are relatively better off on an absolute basis.” which is an odd way of putting it. Yes, Warren lost $8billion, which is probably more than I’ll make in my entire life combined but he didn’t lose his livelihood. He didn’t lose his ability to keep a roof over his head or feed himself. On an absolute basis someone who lost their job and is no longer able to feed their kids is absolutely in worse shape than Warren Buffet.

    1. Why is it that if we raise taxes on the bottom 50% by 2.5% is horrible, but if we raise 2.5% for the top 20%, it’s OK? Don’t you know discrimination is illegal? We need to fight for equality every single day.

      1. State of Reason

        Do you not see the difference between taking away a poor family’s grocery money and taking away a portion of a wealthy family’s private jet fund? Seriously, if someone’s making $20,000 they’re barely making ends meet. If you take 2% of that you’re only getting $400 but you’re making it harder for them to support themselves. If someone’s making $2,000,000 and you take away another 2% you get $40,000 and you don’t make it remotely more difficult for them to support themselves. Maybe they can’t buy that second Porche but you’re not taking away their ability to feel their family or to keep a multi-million dollar roof over their heads.

        So, you can tax the poor, get virtually no money out of it and seriously impact their ability to support themselves.

        Or, you can tax the rich, get tons of money and they would barely even notice the difference in their paycheck.

        As an alternative you could just tax all income at the same rate. I’ve never understood why you would pay a lower tax rate for the income your broker makes you buying and selling stock than a miner pays on his income hauling coal out of a mine. You’d pull in a lot of money taxing capital gains at the same rate as wages.

        1. Why are we talking about extremes here i.e 20K vs. the $2,000,000?

          Why don’t we talk about $33,000 single guy in Iowa, or the $150,000 couple in San Francisco vs someone making $300,000? These are much more common examples, and the whole point of the debate.

          Yes of course it’s fair to raise taxes $825, $3,725, and $7,500 for the three incomes below. Why are we just raising money from the person making over $200,000? We need to all pitch in and not discriminate! You can’t make $33,000 in Iowa and call to raise people’s taxes who make over $200,000 if you aren’t paying more yourself.

          Of course if you are at the poverty level, we’re not asking you to pay more taxes.

      2. State of Reason

        For some reason it’s not letting me reply to your most recent post, so I’ll reply to your previous one.

        I believe that we should eliminate all of the Bush era tax cuts, not only those on the wealthy. Leaving out those in poverty of course. I don’t believe that anyone would even notice a 2-4% increase in their taxes and that would make a far bigger dent in the deficit than just a 2% increase on those making over $200k.

        I was bringing up the “extreme” of someone making $20,000 because some people here keep pitching such a fit about the “50% of people who aren’t paying any taxes”. Most of those people are poor. Very poor. There’s a percentage that make somewhat more but get various deductions (kids, house, etc) that bring them down to $0 but most of those people are just extremely poor. BTW, I do support repealing most of those deductions.

        I hadn’t mentioned people making 33k or 150k because no politicians have the balls to raise taxes universally so the only tax increases on the table are those for individuals making over 200K or couples making over 250K. If you’re an individual making over $200K you’re rich. I don’t care what anyone else says but if you’re making well over 4 times what the average American makes then you’re rich. If you’re having trouble getting by while making $200K then you’re just bad with money and you should take a class or give power of attorney over to someone with a clue. I don’t care where you’re living. I have friends in San Francisco and NYC making 30-40K and surviving just fine.

        So, in short, I agree that everyone should chip in to solve our problems but sadly our politicians are spineless weasels and won’t propose that. The options currently on the table though, increases on wealthy families, are a good start. Bringing taxes on high income earners up from the near record lows they’re currently at is not unreasonable and it’s not class warfare.

        1. Why does $200,000 + $200,000 not equal $400,000? Why does it equal $250,000 as a target for a couple to pay more taxes? Does the govt expect one spouse to suddenly take a 80% pay cut?

      3. I understand, and no one wants to help a freeloader – however when you are in the bottom bracket and do not have adequate access to education, healthcare, etc it means the mechanisms to pull yourself up by your bootstraps isn’t present at is was back when education was considered a public good and not a private investment. Right now the bottom aren’t fighting for fairness, they are fighting for survival, and a chance that maybe tomorrow will be better for them and their kids. You can order yourself a pizza and eat it in front of a child who hasn’t had anything to eat that day, after all, this child hasn’t done anything to contribute to the making of that pizza. You know you can’t eat all of it, but that’s not the point, this child didn’t earn it so in order to teach this child a lesson you refuse to share. When the child dies of starvation – well good riddance, she was being a lazy parasite anyway…

  317. But the bottom 50% only own 2.5% of America’s wealth. Taxing them more doesn’t make any god damn sense. They don’t have the wages to tax. Just because they don’t pay income tax doesn’t mean they don’t pay taxes– they pay federal, state sales tax, plus payroll taxes, and since they make less money and devote a higher percentage of their income to necessities like food, they pay “more” in relative terms than the rich do. If you don’t think most people in the bottom 50% would be happy to make enough money to qualify to pay income taxes, put your money “where your misguided mouth is” and switch salaries with one of them.

    1. WEALTH and income are 2 seperate things.
      Income is what you get today, wealth is aquired over time.

      “If you don’t think most people in the bottom 50% would be happy to make enough money to qualify to pay income taxes, put your money “where your misguided mouth is” and switch salaries with one of them.”

      I have been there. I’ve made minimum wage in the past. But I’ve improved myself. I made myself marketable. I’ve also had periods of unemployment, but have always returned to work-BECAUSE I was marketable.

      Marketable means more than JUST an education. Its developing skills, its developing quality, its drive, its work ethic. When people are looking to hire someone, they’re looking for more than filling a position and paying a check. They’re looking for someone who not only HAS the ability to get the job done, but the drive to do it, to show up and get it done, and the drive to do it well.

      Like John Wayne said: “Lifes hard. Its even harder if your stupid”.

      Thats life. Hard. If you’re not going to be motivated enough to improve yourself, to make yourself marketable, to get that better paying job, THERE ARE others who are, and will get that higher paying job, leaving you whatevers left over.

      Of course thats where todays tax system comes in.

      We have “sin” taxes on cigarettes to discourage smoking, “sin” taxes on alcohol to discourage drinking, “sin” taxes on fast food to discourage eating fast food…
      And “sin” taxes on income and wealth to discourage prosperity. Wealth today is viewed as a sin.
      We can’t have one person earning more than another, so lets tax the one earning more. Who cares WHY he’s earning more.

  318. What you do not realize though is the people who make over 50% are the people who are also making silent income. In other word they are the ones who own homes and are able to write off all of their interest which makes them have even less taxable income. Plus the appreciation (and I know the housing melt down has killed this) that they make year after year. For example a person buys a $200,000 home and see’s his equity go up 6% a year, which historically is where real estate has been until recently, and he’s making an extra $12,000 a year compounded. Then a little bit higher up you have people who own business’s who can turn around and sell their business’s. And having owned a business for 22 years I know all of the write-off’s a person gets. Look at Warren Buffet who paid 7 million when he’s worth billions. These are the people who take their personnal jets and fly to Hawaii to golf and write the whole thing off because they took 10 minutes to talk about something business related. The poor will never own anything and will do nothing but rent, which will make even more money for the top 50%. Sticking it to the poor is not the answer. Clinton was the last one to have a balance budget and he did it with higher taxes. We need to get rid of all of the Bush era tax cuts starting with the richest 2% like Obama wanted to do and then after the economy heats up the rest of us need to step up to the plate until we get our budget under control. Go back to what works.

    1. President Obama

      wouldn’t a flat tax solve this problem? after a certain income level of course. let’s say after 25k you are taxed at a flat rate of 20%. no write offs, nothing. FLAT…

    2. ” In other word they are the ones who own homes and are able to write off all of their interest which makes them have even less taxable income.”

      “And having owned a business for 22 years I know all of the write-off’s a person gets. ”

      Your not near as smart as you think.
      Mortgage interest write offs are capped at $1 million of mortgages. If you have a $200 mortgage you can write off the entire amount of interest. If you have a $2 million dollar mortgage you can only write off the interest on up to the $1 million point. If you own a home beyond that with a mortgage. Too bad so sad, no write off.

      “These are the people who take their personnal jets and fly to Hawaii to golf and write the whole thing off because they took 10 minutes to talk about something business related. ”

      You’re full of S#!T

      If you believe that, then YOU NEVER owned a business for 22 years.

      “Look at Warren Buffet who paid 7 million when he’s worth billions. ”

      Again, if you believe that, then you never owned a business. 7 million in taxes is paid on income or capital gains. He’s WORTH billions. Worth IS NOT income. If you can’t tell the difference between worth and income, you’re a lousy business person.

      You’d also realize that though Buffet is worth $39 billion, his wealth has been sheltered because he never really SELLS anything. His investments keep appreciating. Until he sells them, his fortune is locked up. When they are sold they will be subject to capital gains taxes, thats when he pays $7 million.

  319. Soak the poor! Let ’em eat cake!
    Boy, you’ve got a generous spirit! As long as it’s other peoples’ money!!!! Something tells me you’ll be quite generous with your neighbor’s neck when they come with the guillotine…

  320. I am in the top 5% and do not mind paying more taxes to get our deficit reduced. The rich pay less in taxes now than at almost any other point in our history. Yet all you hear from the rich is how high taxes are And how much it hurts the economy. BS. The best way to avoid taxes is to spend money or invest it in new business or real estate. If the rich get taxed more, they will spend and invest more in the economy in order to avoid taxes. Win win.

    1. No one is stopping you from paying more taxes, so if you dont mind doing so, why dont you voluntarily pay a higher percentaget than what you are legally obligated to? Put your money where your misguided mouth is.

      1. If you read my post I said I would not mind if it meant our deficit was reduced. One person paying a few percentages more is not going to change the deficit and is pointless. If everyone in the top 5% paid a few percentages more than it would make a huge difference. We might actually gain some ground on getting the country back on track.

        Please tell me how I am misguided? Or do you just like tell people they don’t know what they are talking about without actually basing it on anything or being able to counter their argument?

        1. The top 5% made an AGI $1,685,472,000 or $1.685 TRILLION approximately THIS YEARS deficit, last years also.

          Raising taxes on the top 5%, a couple of percentage points, will have virtually no affect on the deficit.

      2. The silly talking point of ” go ahead and voluntarily pay more taxes” is tiresome and nonsensical.

        1. Actually Lucy it is not tiresome and nonsensical because it is true. It would show us that Buffet means what he says, rather than simply trying to “impose his morality on the rest of us”. I for one (and I make less than $70,000 a year – gross) am sick of the envious leeches in our society. When is the last time any of you have reached out and bought lunch for the pan-handler, or better yet, when is the last time you took a street person in, fed them and let them sleep in your home? When is the last time you took warm clothes to someone trying to stay warm on the grates in the middle of winter, or took the time to serve them food in a soup kitchen. If you haven’t done these things and continue to do them on a regular basis then you are nothing more than bags of wind. Your self-righteous talk is cheap, and shows you what you really are – hypocrites. Pull your damn wallets out and do something. Otherwise shut the hell up. I’m tired of you attempting to “impose your morality” on the rest of us, especially given the fact that you are nothing more than thieves. And because you might have the majority in power doesn’t make you no less a thief, but it does turn you into thugs. Having power and making something legal does not make it moral.

      3. How’s this idea, we raise the taxes to 1990 levels for those peole who got about a Trillion dollars in tax cuts over the last 10 years, and use that money to pay down the 5 TRILLION dollars that our last president added to our national debt. Seems like a good idea, don’t you agree?

        1. Congress is in charge of spending.

          Half of the debt incurred under Bush was the last 2 years when Pelousi and Reid were incharge of spending. In Zeros first 2 years Zero and Pelousi and Reid increased the debt by $3 TRILLION.

  321. Yeah, it’s just 43 bucks, that’s only about a 3 percentage point hike for the lower half, or only a little more than double their current effective tax rate. And an equal increase for the upper half would raise over 210 billion more. 210 plus 60. But that’s still way short of the trillion dollars needed to balance the budget. But if the top 1% kicked in at 50%, that would raise a total of over 1 trillion. Budget balanced. Really, no one is going to live much worse on 650,000 than at 1.3 million, the average household income for the top 1% (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities), not that anyone living on 1650 a month would notice, anyway. And if they did, no one would feel sorry for them.

      1. Do you realize that a person in the bottom 50% (that doesn’t pay income taxes), would have to work over 100 years to make what a person making $350K after income taxes makes in one year? In the 1980’s I worked for a couple of small businesses where the owners made this kind of money. If it wasn’t for the hard work of low paid workers these businesses wouldn’t make any money.

        1. And if the small business owner hadn’t taken the risk and invested the capital to start that business, those low paid hard working employees would have been unemployed.

      2. Sandra Howerton

        Yes, 50% is the least people who make over $1 million a year should contribute. Otheres, in most cases, contributed to their success but do not make nearly that much money: the teachers who educated them, the people who built the infrastructure they probably used more than average, the people who probably worked for them for a pittance so that they could reap most of the benefits–if they even earn their money by working. Many are trust-fund babies who have never worked a day in their lives and just live off investments. At any rate, anyone should be able to do just fine on $500,000 a year, and most of the CEO would still take home many millions even after paying 50% in income tax. The shame is not that some people pay no federal income tax (and remember that they still pay a large percentage of their incomes in other taxes); the shame is that in the richest country in the world 50% of the earners do not make enough money to pay federal income tax!

        1. Do you make $1 million? Do you even make over $350,000? How would you know how much they pay and how they feel? How can you judge someone when you have never walked in their shoes?

          Why do you think 50% of American earners don’t make more than 33K?

  322. I am a student, and have been working since I was 7 years old. I see people all the time who are satisfied just living paycheck to paycheck, I made up my mind that I am going to be in the top 10% my goal is to be there by age 35. I do get tired of all the parasites in this world living on unemployment not looking for jobs and having kids just to get food stamps, I understand not everyone on these programs are bad, some just have had some bad breaks, but not one would ever get to the top of the mountain if the quit climbing every time the slipped. I thought your post was beneficial and enjoyed reading it. Thank you Anderson

    1. I don’t think you will ever achieve your goal because you sound like someone who is not very bright. You sound like someone who has been brainwashed by those right wing talking points

    2. I think people who think the poor and disabled and lower class have the ability or opportunity to support themsevles are ignorant. Especially these last several years with jobs leaving and highest level of unemployment most of us have ever experienced.

      Most of the people who need government assistance long before 2007 are the “undesirable or disabled or elderly” there are no employers willing to hire within this class of people… So all you right wingers who claim to have compassion and support life- Please tell us all who specifically are the employers willing to hire anyone in this group if they even have an jobs to offer.. Secondly, please break down in detail how a person who may be lucky enough to land a low skill full time minimum wage job is supposed to survive on minimum wage without living ? please break down where the person’s entire $1200 per month is going to cover? most of these jobs do no cover health insurance so calculate that too and then you go read “Nicke and Dimed” 2 real people who quit their over 40K jobs to take a year off to see if they could really live off minimum wage in this country.

      I challenge you to do the same- and God help you if you even have one child to care for..

      Grow a heart and some eyes.

      1. I agree living on $1,200 a month is next to impossible but this is why people need to get a good education or at the least learn a trade. By the way all of us right wingers do not claim to have a heart I honestly could care less about those who have less then me. My answer is that they should work harder if possible and if not then seek help from friends, family, church or private charity group willing to help. I just do not want to pay the way for others no mater how much I make a year. No matter what liberals like to think my money is not theirs it is mine and I just want to be left alone to do with it as I see fit.

        1. I think what toni is referring to is the Right Wingers who supposedly have such strong “family values”, and those who tout their religion as if they are better than other people. If you think about it, “What would Jesus do”? He would NOT be a Tea Partier!

          Good for you , seaton, to admit you have no heart! Not many would admit that!

        2. I cant belive you are human. to not care far others is not human , i care more far a dog thaqn you do people. !!!

      2. I grew up poor in New York. My Mom made $22,000 with two kids and we came out fine. I am in the top 10% and it’s BS to think that no one else can make it too. It’s all about work ethic and smart decisions. Oh yeah I’m Black BTW, since I was told I wouldn’t even make it past the age 21 where I grew up.

        1. Neither me nor any ‘left-wing’ politician I have listened to are saying that “no one else can make it”. That claim is a pure strawman.

          The problem is expecting that a high, or even a medium-sized, portion of them can make it. Most people from poor families must get near-minimum-wage jobs to support their parents. Worse is that dividing one’s time between a job, a family, and school cuts performance in one or more significantly, especially for youths.

          So between the forfeit of college for knowledge of a job and sacrificing grades to keep a job, you can’t logically or morally expect most of them getting to the same point you have.

          I won’t get into how your mother having a $10.57-per-hour-at-40-hours-a-week job in a household with two working people would have made you not that poor.

      3. Minimum wage is near starting point pay. Nobody needs to stay there. I started there.
        I went to a community college while making just over minimum wage. I worked 30-40 hours a week plus carried a full load at school, and paid my own way. My mom worked in a factory. My parents were divorced and my dad paid NOTHING-EVER, to my mom or for my education.
        When I got done with school I STARTED my career working in factories making $7 an hour. I worked my way up from there.
        All you people who mention minimum wage.
        You might as well be saying minimum work.
        “Hey, I only make minimum wage.” “Hey I only do the minimum amount of work to get paid.”
        Minimum wage is fine for kids. Its where the learn to work. Those who STAY there aren’t trying.

    3. Good for you Anderson, but the entire argument that we’re somehow in this current situation or the cause of our ills is somehow related to lazy, unmotivated poor people is a complete farce and a total strawman argument — it’s empty headed and without any common sense.

      Of course there are leeches at the bottom just as their are vampires at the top. And, for the most part this is fine, there are people who suck from every single walk of life, race, creed, culture, etc. The REAL problem is that the vampires at the top have the ABILITY, MEANS and, most importantly, the MOTIVATION to actually affect change for their own benefit to the detriment everybody else.

      Seaton’s comment is a classic example. He just doesn’t give a crap about anyone below him, so why would he give two squirts about corrupting the system to his benefit and their detriment? And, that’s the point — he wouldn’t.

      We’ve been seeing the results of this behavior for the last 30 years. Massive policy changes enacted by the affluent for the benefit of the affluent — enormous reductions in tax rates, huge loopholes, massive changes to capital gains and dividend taxes, etc. Creating the most massive movement of wealth from the poor to the rich in our nation’s history.

      At the same time, unsurprisingly, we’ve seen the middle class stagnate and shrink and poverty rates have soared. Why do you think this is?

      What exactly do you think the endgame is going to look like if we don’t stop it? For one, if you’re in the top brackets your taxes are going to SKYROCKET as more and more wealth accumulates at the top. So, for your own benefit, you might want to reconsider how much pain you can tolerate now to avoid what’s going to happen in the next decade.

  323. Yeah, the 40 year old woman with the IQ of sixty five, who can’t hold down a job just because she’s a little slower than the masses of younger people competing to work at McDonalds… Yeah, she can do it, just like you! Or how about the single mom with the autistic child? She can surely work forty hours a week week at Mcdonalds, just like you did! How about the disabled man who can’t stand up for more than two hours straight? Lets tax him too! That’s fair! These people are all friends of mine. I believe they have a right to complain if they want to. You do realize that $1,650 is barely enough to rent a small appartment in a “vibrant area,” right? Do you actually know anyone that isn’t in the top 25%? Congratulations indeed.

    1. You need to take care of your friends Susan. So should the relatives, kids and parents too. That’s what everybody around the world do. Take care of each other.

      Don’t underestimate the power of the human spirit of the poor to want to pay more and contribute to society. Nobody wants a hand out. People want an opportunity. Don’t look down on people Susan.

      1. You are an idiot if you think that disabled people would be able to survive with the help of friends and family. I highly doubt you even know anyone who is disabled, because if you did, you would know how much equipment they need costs. Having a disabled son, I can tell you that something that probably costs a company a few hundred dollars to make costs in the tens of thousands of dollars to purchase… and guess what… the majority of the time insurance does not cover it.

        1. Thanks for your kind words. I know a couple immediate disabled folks, one who cannot walk, and a couple who have mental retardation. The one with mental retardation is being taken care of by her family, and the support of her sisters. The one who cannot walk has learned to roll and is working a desk job at a high tech company. The last thing he’d want is a hand out from the gov’t and pity from you.

          What are your suggestions to the solution then? You might want to read this article with the healthcare portion https://www.financialsamurai.com/2011/08/01/socialism-as-a-means-to-a-brighter-future/

  324. David Scott

    A McDonald manager median rate in the U.S. doesn’t even make 3x your $3.50 per hour in 2011 let alone a general worker which is in the $7.50 hourly median range. Your $43 a month which is $513 annually includes physically & mentally challenged people and people that for whatever reason do not have the capabilities to do the upper paying jobs. If you are a person who makes over $200,000.00 annually or even $100,000.00 and you cannot give a little more, than you are not handling your money correctly and do not care about your fellow man.

      1. It’s not about who pays most of the income taxes, the question should be about who should pay more at this time. I’m sure you think the poor, with their disproportionately large unemployment rates and dead-in-the-water wage growth are the group who should pay more. Personally, I’m still waiting for the 5-10 trillion dollars the Bush tax cuts have returned to the wealthy to trickle down…. waiting… waiting…. oh wait, they did trickle down – in China and India. Do the wealthy pay a higher share of taxes than the poor? Yes. Do they pay less in the US than any other wealthy country on Earth? That’s also a yes. Given our current fiscal challenges, why shouldn’t they pay more?

        1. Because we live in America, not in other countries of the world.

          Don’t estimate the poor or those in the bottom 50%. I’m sure most would be proud to pay and help contribute to Federal Taxes given our difficult times. We just have too many loupholds and credits which allow half the population to pay nothing. Most wouldn’t too ifthey didn’t have to. But most would gladly of they did.

          Flat tax above a certain poverty level. Always fight for equality!

      2. Sandra Howerton

        It’s not the total amount of tax people in different income groups pay that matters. It’s the percentage of their income that goes to taxes. The very top earners average paying only 18%, down from 35-90% during most of the last century. We had a much fairer and better economic and social situation for the whole country when they were paying higher taxes

      3. You’re clearly being highly selective with what specific tax data you reveal here Samurai. And the final data about how much the bottom 50% pay in taxes is completely false because you are ONLY considering federal income taxes.

        While it’s true the Top 1% pay 36% of ALL income taxes. They ONLY pay 4% of ALL payroll taxes. Income taxes make up only 40% of all federal revenue. Payroll taxes make up and equal amount of all federal revenue — 40%.

        The bottom 99% pay 64% of all income taxes and 96% of all payroll taxes.

        And, this does nothing to address the numerous regressive taxes that are far more largely subsidized by the poor and middle class such as sales, gas and similar taxes, which make up the vast.

        The vast majority of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes, which makes it a far more relevant number to study due to its high regressivity.

        1. Your entire response is complete BS.

          What are the differences in payroll taxes and income taxes???
          When you get your check 3 taxes are removed. Federal income, state income, and FICA.

          After the end of the year, most people will get a return or rebate, on their federal income tax. Meaning they will not have paid as much (if any) federal income tax.
          That leaves state income taxes (in mine thats 5%, some don’t have any) and then FICA, which is currently 5.65%.

          Now your number that the bottom 99% pay 64% is utter bulls#!t. Since payroll taxes are divided up by Fed, state and FICA . And considereing that the top 50% pay 96% of all federal income tax, its obvious that your numbers are total lies.

          Next lets look at FICA taxes. Your check reflects your contribution of 5.65%. What its DOES NOT show is the 7.65% that your employer ALSO must pay. This is not withholding. That is what your check says your employer holds back from your check and pays to the government for you. Your employer must ALSO pay an additional 7.65% out of his pocket, profit or not. Total current FICA taxes are 13.30%

          Total federal tax revenues are
          42% federal income tax
          40% FICA taxes
          and 9% corporate taxes

          with the remaining 9% being other taxes.

          If you’re going to be a liar, at least do a little research so that you’re not so easily exposed.

          I have looked up “payroll” taxes to see if MAYBE we might be talking about 2 different things.
          Nope! Payroll taxes are exactly as I described.

    1. Until you come up with a better idea than finding the most productive people in society and deciding that they need to part with more of the money they earned so you can distribute it to people who didn’t earn it, you’re going to be nothing but a parasite. You want people who earn over $100K to pay more? Then go earn that much, and pay more yourself. Personally, I think I can decide far better than the government what to do with my money.

      1. The point is, above a certain level the money you earn isn’t due to your own productivity, but rather because you’ve found a way to be a parasite yourself and reap the benefits of other’s labor. In most of the first world countries a company CEO makes between 11 and 30X an average worker – in this country its over 450X – that’s not right, it’s certainly not “productive”.

        1. Actually, that response is so mind-numbingly stupid that I’m hard-pressed to respond. Robert, when you’ve come up with a concept that enables you to provide something valuable to a large group of people and, in so doing, provide employment to another group of people, you may be a number of things, but a parasite isn’t one of them. A parasite is the guy at the protest who smugly demands that the government start handing out the fruits of other people’s labor and ingenuity.

        2. Let me get this straight. I went to school after high school, to develope knowledge and skills, to be used in the work place. I work a job that pays me a very good hourly rate, because I’m more skilled and harder working than someone at McDonalds. I then work 60 hours a week, increasing my income. I then live modestly, so that I can try and make wise financial decisions. I invest my money into my 401k or into buying stock in a company, that provides YOU a job, and then you complain about that.

          And who is the parasite?
          Tell you what. Quit your job, and take YOUR OWN money, and start YOUR OWN business. Quit being a parasite on other peoples money. Remember. You MUST buy all your own tools and equipment and do all the work yourself, because otherwise you’re being a parasite and benefiting from someone elses labor. You can’t get a loan from a bank either, because your borrowing money other peoples money that they worked for. Meaning your a parasite.

          Idiots like you would be the first people I’d fire. If you’re this stupid about the basics of life and labor, you’re probably lazy at your work and lazy at developing your skill, and useless to me as an employee. Seriously, anyone who thinks that a job PROVIDER is a parasite, isn’t going to improve themselves just to be drained by their boss. Anybody who views their employer as a parasite isn’t going to give their boss a hard days work, because their boss is just leaching off them anyway. And if I have somebody who views me that way, they are useless to me and can EASILY be replaced.

    1. The bottom 50% should pitch in and stop being a drag on the economy. They should GIVE more than they take. Everybody should, then we wouldn’t have this problem!

      1. Sandra Howerton

        The bottom 50% already pitch in plenty–more when total taxes are calculated than the tope 1%. The bottom 50% pay a much higher percentage of their incomes than the top 50% when ALL taxes are considered because almost all taxes except federal income tax are extrememly regressive. That’s why federal income tax has traditionally been more progressive (thought it is much less so now–to make up partially for the regressive nature of sales, FICA, poroperty, and most local and state income taxes. For example, a person who makes $106,000 or less pays twice the percentage of income that a person making $212,000 makes because FICA is charged only on the first $106,000, making it a ridiculously regressive tax. I’d love to see all the whining that would go on if the rich and big corporations, who receive the really big amounts of “welfare” in the form of tax loopholes, credits, and subsidies had to “GIVE more than they take.” Many of them take billions and pay NOTHING or get money from the treasury. The system is simply not anywhere close to fair. That is why we have the greatest income/wealth disparity of any so-called advanced nation. Actually, we are much closer to third-world nations in that respect as well as in many others, including lack of access for everyone to affordable health care and crumbling infrastructure. We have let the rich rob the whole country blind.

        1. Thank you Sandra. You are completely correct. I notice that no one had the guts to take issue with you, let alone acknowledge that you were correct, but you are in fact correct.

          As a small buisness person, i see it very clearly. 15% tax on social security, More on Medicare. These are taxes that everybody pays at below $106k, that are not paid by the wealthy. On the other hand, the wealthiest americans do not pay income tax to any significant degree. They pay captal gains, at 15%. That’s it. My taxes, with state, federal, social security, medicare, sales tax etc easily exceed 50% on the margin. The truly wealthy pay a third of that.

          Poor and middle class people pay thier fair share and more than they can afford. Tax cuts to the rich only increase that burden. I think the wealthy should pay at the same rate I do, and I don’t appologize for that. Maybe if they paid their fair share, we coulde make taxes more equitable for everyone.

        2. First of all, name just one one of those BIG corporations, please. You people always talk about them but never identify any of them. Second, if you bothered to check your pension/retirement funds you will probably find that they are invested in one of more of these BIG corporations (i.e. you are a shareholder in them). That means you lose if they tank, or are taxed out of existence. FICA (the world’s largest Ponzi scheme) was originally supposed to be egalitarian; everyone, no matter their incomes would pay only a small FICA ‘contribution’ and everyone would only receive the same small supplimentary pension income. But of course, our liberal Congress over the years kept raising the ‘contribution’ limits. What’s fair about paying a whole lot to Social Security but not being able to collect any more than someone only paying in a fraction of your ‘contribution’? Access to affordable health care? It is federal law that no hospital may deny services to anyone regardless of that person’s ability to pay. Name just ONE person in the country who had died because of a lack of medical care. Or for that matter anyone who has starved to death from a lack of food because he or she was too poor. Wealth disparity? Your average ‘poor’ American has at least a furnished room or apartment (heated and or cooled and with indoor plumbing), food stamps, free bus passes, the best medical care in the world, dozens of federal-state-county-city aid programs, color television, cell phone, and in many cases a car. How much of that does your average middle class (or even upperclass) North Korean have? Finally,progressive is just a socialist buzzword for ‘punish the rich’. If you work extra hard, get really lucky, and by the grace of GOD carve out a better life than your neighbors people like you think it is unfair and you should be punished (taxed even more). Try putting in 18 hour days in university to get that degree, then when you finally do get an entry level job and have a family to support (never mind the thousands in loans to be repaid) drag your butt out of bed at 5am to get to work early after putting in an extra 2 hours the day before and then working at home after dinner until midnight on your graduate degree because it is what your profession demands. THAT’s what rich people do to get ahead. And all so they can support the 50% who pay no income taxes at all.

        3. @dqn:
          1.” name just one one of those BIG corporations,” (who paid no taxes).: Bank of America and GE.
          2.”What’s fair about paying a whole lot to Social Security but not being able to collect any more than someone only paying in a fraction of your ‘contribution’? ” Social Security benefits ARE based on your lifetime earnings/contributions.
          3.”Name just ONE person in the country who had died because of a lack of medical care”. OK, I can’t name one specifically, but you are naive if you think the uninsured receive the same quality medical care that those of us fortunate enough to have good insurance receive. Yes, hospitals cannot turn away someone who has a life-threatening condition, but they don’t receive the same expensive treatments that the insured receive. And if that treatment could have saved their life, (eg. chemotherapy), their lack of insurance could kill them.
          4. “Progressive” tax system – Do you believe the United States has been Socialist since 1913?

        4. Sandra Howerton

          Thank you, Craig, dqn, and Janna for your responses. Craig and Janna are right. I will just add a few points:

          In response to dqn’s claim that everyone in the U.S. has access to affordable health care: ERs have to give life-saving treatment to patients regardless of ability to pay, but they do not have to furnish on-going care for health- and life-threatening conditions like diabetes and cancer. If a person with cancer shows up at an ER, they are going to stabilize him and give him a referral for cancer treatment; but if he is un- or underinsured, actually getting that treatment is going to be iffy. If he is lucky, he may find a charitable organization or medical facility that will give him the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of treatment he needs; however, in many cases, he will not. If he does get treatment, who do you think is paying for it (and for his ER treatment for that matter)? We are, through higher medical costs and insurance premiums, to the tune of at least $1000 per insured or paying person per year. It would be much less expensive, more efficient, fairer, more effective, and more humane to have a national healthcare system that covers everyone as other advanced nations do.

          People certainly DO die in the U.S. because of lack of access to medical care. A Harvard study in 2009 estimated that 45,000 deaths occur each year because of lack of health coverage. That is a national disgrace! news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/.

          To say that the average poor American has “the best health care in the world” is just ridiculous. Even average Americans do not have the best health care in the world for the most part. We have poorer health outcomes than citizens of other industrialized nations in almost all categories . Our healthcare system was ranked 37th by the World Health Organization in 2000, and a Commonwealth Fund report in 2010 ranked it last in “quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and the ability [of citizens] to lead long, healthy, productive lives” in comparison with six other industrialized countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the U.K. See . The only thing we rank first in is cost. That is what a for-profit health system has given us!

          About big companies paying no taxes, see blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/03/ten_giant_us_companies_avoidin.html or many other articles on the web that you can Google. I have seen lists of as many as 50 large companies that have paid no taxes in at least one of the past few years.

          However, I think by far the most misguided comment by dqn and others is about how rich people work so hard to get ahead and therefore deserve much, much more than others. First, I think that many rich people have worked hard and provided worthwhile goods and services and therefore deserve to be materially rewarded (just not to the obscene extent the ones at the top are). However, there are also a good many who are trustee babies and have never worked a day; and there are many who obtained their fortunes through taking unfair advantage of and cheating people, selling worthless goods and services, and even participating in illegal activities. So I don’t think it is accurate to say that all rich people deserve what they have. In fact, I can conceive of absolutely nothing that even truly productive and conscientious CEOs do that would justify even 20% of the tens of millions of dollars many of them make. Secondly, many people who have put in 18-hour days to get a university degree and gotten up early and stayed up late to get a graduate degree while working at a full-time job do not get rich because they have chosen a profession that provides great value to society but does not furnish great material rewards, such as teaching, scientific research, engineering, nursing, firefighting, etc. I not only worked long and hard to obtain graduate degrees but also worked 60- to 80-hour weeks teaching, grading papers, preparing lessons and taking frequent continuing education courses for thirty years. It was, I think, extremely worthwhile work; but it certainly did not make me rich. I reject the idea that any rich person worked any longer or harder than I did. I think few work any longer or harder or do anything more worthwhile than teachers, nurses, doctors, physician assistants, firefighters, police officers, scientists, small business owners, trash collectors, construction workers, plumbers, retail workers, or other average working people do. Mostly, they have figured out how to make a great deal of money off the work of other people. I am not saying that all incomes should be equal; but during the past thirty years of government favoritism toward the rich, the degree of inequality has gotten really out of line (the ratio between what the CEO and the average worker make has increased to 325 to 1 in 2010 from about 24 to 1 in 1965) and, if left uncorrected, it will lead to economic downfall and social unrest (which seems to have already started but will get much, much worse) if history is any guide. If rich people have any sense and any knowledge of history and sociology, they will join Warren Buffett in asking to pay a fairer share for a system that they profit from disproportionately out of self-interest if not out of a sense of social responsibility.

        5. You’re a hoot.

          Here’s the reality of taxes.

          Take a married couple, 2 kids, making $50k a year.
          Basic deductions for the husband and wife $5700 each or $11,400.
          Standard exemption for the husband, wife and 2 kids, $3700 each or $14,800

          So, out of a $50k income, $26,200 is written off. Over half their income.
          Next, Federal income tax.
          10% of the first $17,000
          ($17k is about 70% of their taxable income.)
          15% of the remainder of $7,800

          Lets look at another couple making 10 times the income .
          First, the standard deduction for the 2 stays the same $5700 per person. Though their income is 10 times more, the dollar value stays the same. So where the first couple had a $50k income , their standard deductions of $11,400 was about 23% of their gross income, whereas its only 2.3% of the wealthier couples.

          Next come the basic exemptions. Both couples get the basic exemptions for their children. $3700 each or $7400. Which is almost 15% for the first couple, but less than 1.5% of income for the second.

          Next personal exemptions for the higher income earners phase out above $370K.
          So the lower income earners take another approximate 15% off their taxable income.

          2 couples, same amount of kids, using the same tax deductions. The only thing that has changed is their income.

          First couple reduces their income by 55%, the second reduces their income by 3.8%.
          The first couple are taxed 10% on $17k (about 70% of taxable income)
          The second couple is taxed the same 10% on the same first $17k (but that is about 4% of their taxable income).

          The first couple pays 15% on the remainder of their income. (which is about 30% of their TI)
          The second couple pays 15% on the next $52,000 (which is about 9.6% of their TI)

          The first couple NEVER gets into the next tax bracket of 25%
          The second couple must pay 25% of their next $70,350 of TI (About 16% of their TI)

          The first couple also NEVER has to pay the next tax bracket of 28%
          The second couple must pay 28% of their next $72,950 of TI (About 17% of their TI)

          The first couple also NEVER has to pay the next tax bracket of 33%
          The second couple must pay 33% of their next $166,850 of TI (About 32% of their TI)

          The first couple also NEVER has to pay the next tax bracket of 35%
          The second couple must pay 35% of their next $102,000 of TI (About 21% of their TI)

          So where the first couple reduces their taxable income by 55%
          The second couple reduces its TI by 3.8% using the same tax rules.
          Where the first couple pays 70% of its TI at a tax rate of 10%
          The second couple pays 86% of its TI at taxrates of 25% or higher

          In fact, the same 70% of TI that the first couple pays 10% tax on
          The second pays 28% or higher ( approximately 34%)

          So where one couple pays 10% tax rate on 70% of their TI
          The other couple pays 34% tax rate on 70% of their TI

          Should we also add all the FICA taxes the the wealthier person pays?
          And all the unemployment taxes?
          And the FUTA taxes?
          And the corporate income taxes?
          And the property taxes?

        6. Sandra Howerton

          Yes, Mountn_Man, you should add ALL the taxes each couple pays, including sales, state, local, and excise taxes, because it is those other regressive taxes that often make those with higher incomes pay a lower percentage of their total incomes in ALL taxes than those with lower incomes. Looking just at federal income tax rates presents an extremely distorted image of the tax system. And you are ignoring the fact that the rich people who get a large amount of their income from capital gains pay only a 15% rate on that part of their income. Of course, there are going to be great variations in individual cases. A person making $500,000 a year purely from a salary is going to pay a higher rate in most cases than a person making $500,000 purely from capital gains.

        7. Sandra, the problem with your FICA illustration, is that employers not only withhold currently 5.65% from payroll checks, they ALSO must pay an additional 7.65%.

          So, when you look at your $1000 check and see $56.50 taken out, you are NOT seeing the entire $133.00 paid in FICA taxes. So, the higher the income (up to $107,000) and the more employees, the more tax an employer pays. Also the more payroll paid the higher unemployment insurance must be paid.
          Also, corporate taxes.Wealthy investors who own stocks in large companies like BP or Microsoft get dividend checks. These checks are paid on profits, AFTER corporate taxes of 35% are paid. These investors then must pay an additional capital gains tax of 15%.

          Sales tax is sales tax. If you buy a TV for $500 and somebody who makes 10 times your income buys a TV, chances are high it will be 10 times as expensive as your TV.
          Next, somebody making $50k is less likely to buy a new car. More than likely they will buy a used car. The wealthier people pay the higher taxes on new cars as opposed to used cars. Wealthier people are more likely to buy more cars.
          Heres something. Lets say you make $80,000 a year. You buy a house. At $80k your house will be about $250,000. If you put 20% down, thats $200,000. The interest on the mortgage is a write off.
          Now lets take someone who makes 10x that much, $800k. They buy a house 10x as much, or $2.5 million. If they also put 20% down that would leave them with a $2 million mortgage. Mortgage interest write offs are limited to $1 million. So where you can write off 100% of your house mortgage, the other person could only write off half of theirs. If they owned a second home on top of that, not of that mortgage would be able to be written off.

          If we take a family of 5. Husband, wife and 3 kids. They have a household income of $40k. The Husband and wife could claim $5800 each for standard deductions, thats $11,600, and have 5 personal and dependent exemptions of $3700, for 18,500. For a total deduction and exemption of $30,100 They have eliminated 75% from being taxed, without spending a dime to do it. Lets see a rich person shelter 75% of their income that easily.
          Next that family of 5 will pay 10% income tax or $990. or 2.5% of gross income.
          A rich person who makes 10x that much, if they sheltered 75% of their income, they’d have a taxable income of $100,000. They’d pay 10% on the first $17,000, or $1,700. They’d then pay 15% on the next $52,000, or $7,800. They’d then pay 25% on the remaining $31,000, or $7,750.

          2 families, both writing off 75% of their respective incomes. 1 family making 10x more in income. One family paying $990 in taxes, the other family paying $17,250 or about 17.5x as much.

          Lets also look at the lower income family. They will also qualify for the EITC, which the government will pay them $5,666. So instead of PAYING federal income tax, they will get paid $4,676.

          $40k a year income will pay $2,260 in FICA taxes. 7 states have no income tax. My state has a 5% income tax. The $40 k income would pay at most $2,000 in state income tax. Subtract that from the $4676 EITC and they are still up $416. If they spent $500 a month on food, thats $6,000 there is a 1% tax on food, that would be $60. That leaves $356. Depending on what county they live in they might be paying 6.5% -11.5% sales tax on most everything else. Lets say 7%. If they spent $6000 on other things besides food, they’d spend $420 in sales tax.
          At this point they finally PAID $64 in taxes.

      2. Whoever made this site is a wack-job. Crazier than Bachmann. If we are talking about”fair” and “equality,” how is it equal that I make more money because I am a male, or at an even more elementary level, more intelligent, or taller, or more handsome, than the next guy. It is not “fair”, but that is how it is. The only thing a person really has control over is how hard they work. Is someone who is making minimum wage not working as hard as you are?

        1. @Chris

          Please provide logical or factual reasons for calling the person who made this site a “wack-job.” Be specific to back up the name-calling… if you can. If you can’t, then go troll somewhere else.

        2. By all means lets have the poorest among us pay more. On a scale that’s fair. The fact that it’s lacking in a basic tenet of decent humanity doesn’t seem to count.

          What’s important is that they pay, not if it’s even feasible. This ‘wack job’ that is stating it’s right and proper to squeeze that 43 dollars out of the working and non able to work poor is just showing us what we all know. Greed is indeed the ailment of this nation.

        3. How hard they work? Remember that half the population has an IQ of less
          that 100. If they work as hard as those with an IQ higher than 100 they will,
          on average, earn less.

          So by working “hard” do you mean how productive they are in absolute terms or doe you mean as a percentage of what they are capable of? If the latter then a person
          with an IQ of 80 who is producing as much as he is capable of should earn
          more than a person with an IQ of 120 who is producing half of what he is
          capable of. Yet the way wages are paid the IQ of 120 person may very well be
          earning much more than the IQ of 80 person.

        4. I worked as a paper boy when I was in Jr HS and HS.
          I worked as a bus boy in HS and early college.
          I worked in a hot dog stand in college.
          I worked in a factory as a welder in my early and mid 20’s.

          I work harder today than I did then.
          My earlier years I learned the skills I use today.
          Those skills pay me more money.
          Even if I worked the same level today, as I did back then, I get paid more for my skills.

          But not only do they pay me more for my skills, they pay me more for the hardness of my work. Which is harder than 99% of minimum wage jobs.

          I also make more over the course of weeks, months or a year, because I work 40-50-60-80 hours a week. MORE hours than most workers do.

          On top of that, I try and take a portion of that “extra” money that I make, because of the harder, more skilled work, working longer hours, and do financial planning with it.
          WHICH IS ALSO more work. More work learning the basics of wise financial planning. More work studying current financial trends. More work implementing the investment.

          And then EVEN MORE WORK tax planning, as tax requirements are higher than the minimum wage person.

          There was a time I made minimum wage.
          BUT…
          BUT…I didn’t stay there.
          While working minimum wage, I went to school. While working minimum wage, I worked extra hours.

          Today, I get paid much more than minimum wage. My job is harder. Requires more skill. Has MUCH tougher working conditions. And requires more time and dedication than anything I did at or a little above minimum wage.

          There is also one other factor. Toughness level.
          A brand new kid, on a football field can’t play at the same level as someone who’s been playing for a few years. The longer player has practice, practice and more practice. They have weight training and more weight training. They have experience.

          So, when both players hit a 300# lineman, are the conditions different for either player? Are the both hitting 300# linemen? Is it harder work for the newbie, or is it easier for the more experienced player. If so, why?

          They are stuck pushing 200# lineman around, because that is their limit, while someone else is pushing 300# lineman, because that is their limit (because they put in the work to move 300# linemen)

          It requires the SAME ENERGY to lift or move 300# whether small or large, weak or strong. Its the one who trains who is able to move it.

          That applies to ALL things in life.

          Military people are toughened up and strengthened over their military career vs new recruits.
          Special Ops takes that EVEN FURTHER.

          Throw a new recruit and a spec op operator in the same scenario, the operator succeeds vs the recruit failing. Why? Same scenario.
          Difference being, training, experience, attitude, strength…

          Its the work done PRIOR that makes the more experienced better at the task. The task requires the same amount of work.

          Likewise, in life, some people never move beyond the minimum wage jobs, because they never do the work or training or exercise to get themselves beyond that.

  325. Sandra Howerton

    There is more to life than income. I think average Western Europeans and Canadians have a better quality of life than average Americans do (and without sacrificing much income or productivity). The workers have better benefits (much longer vacations and other time off work, generous paid sick and parental leave, earlier retirement, and more job security), and they do not have to worry about how to pay for excellent health care (with better results than in the U.S.), education, child care, or elder care. They live in societies with less crime, poverty, and other social ills. In most Western European countries, they even have better quality infrastructure: well-maintained highways, fast trains, faster and cheaper broadband, and more reliable cell phone service. Not that everything is perfect in those countries, but I don’t think the average person there would trade his or her way of life for the rat-race life so many Americans have. The thing I find most ironic is that the GOP is always harping on family values, but their policies actually keep people from having time to spend with their families–time that those “socialist” Europeans and Canadians do have.

  326. These are not accurate statistics. Only 34% of Americans earn more than $65,000 a year. If you want to compare American income with worldwide income then let’s also include where America ranks in income disparity. With the top 1% controlling as much wealth as the bottom 50% and the median pay for S&P 500 CEOs is $10.6 million and it’s $19.8 million for the CEOs in the companies listed on the Dow Jones Industrials while the median household income is $46,326. https://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
    This difference in pay between the executive and the worker places the United States 64th in the world. The pay gap between the richest and poorest is more equitable in Cameroon, the Ivory Coast Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen than in the United States.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2005550/Americas-pay-gap-Inequality-rich-poor-worse-revolutionary-Egypt.html#ixzz1VRqB3GHk
    Columbia University just released the 2011 starting salary for journalists in America. Their starting pay is $30,000. The starting pay for a journalist in America is 2006 was $30,000. In 5 years the starting pay has not moved.
    “It’s even more revealing to compare the actual rates of increase of the salaries of CEOs and ordinary workers; from 1990 to 2005, CEOs’ pay increased almost 300% (adjusted for inflation), while production workers gained a scant 4.3%. The purchasing power of the federal minimum wage actually declined by 9.3%, when inflation is taken into account.”
    While websites like this parrot the propaganda of the financial and power elite the truth is that for the vast majority of Americans the last 30 years of Reaganomics has been a complete failure. More people need food stamps than ever before and CEOs are setting records for salary and bonuses. In the two years following the bailout of Wall Street the executive pay for financial companies set records for salary and benefits as well as bonuses. For the financial elite the last 30 years have been the most prosperous ever. Considering that the corporate media is controlled by the financial elite it is no surprise that the average American actually believes this is the best economic system in the world. And the rest of the world’s financial elite is catching on as one country after another institute austerity programs that gut social programs while protecting the assets of the wealthy. Never before in the history of the world have so few controlled so much wealth while so many of the most vulnerable are left with less and less. The governments of the world, lead by the US Congress, are now focused on protecting and promoting the assets of the financial elite while the middle class is expected to shoulder more and more of the economic burden. The suffering of the middle class will be the downfall of this system. The propaganda of the corporate media has succeeded in wiping from the memory of the majority of the American people the 50 years proceeding 1980. In that time the American middle class was more prosperous and more contented than at any time in the history of America. From 1930-1980, when the tax rate on the top tier was high and the public and private unions were strong, America’s middle class saw their salaries rising every year and keeping pace with the executives. When CEO salaries were only 20x greater than the average worker the average worker could afford 2 weeks of vacation every year and a new car every other. As long as the financial elite continue on their path of greed and short-term profits America’s economy will never recover. Until the government abandons the trickle-down economics of Reagan and returns to a Keynesian economic model with strong financial regulations, moderate corporate taxes and 1970 era tax rate for the wealthy then America’s middle class will continue to struggle, suffer and ultimately sink into the ranks of the poor. When the poor are the majority in America then the end of Capitalism will be close behind.

  327. I’m glad to be an American. Willing to pay my fair share.

    In this view, we should pay according to what we earn as it relates to the countries total expenses. A relationship of taxable earnings to the countries expenses. So, if the top 1% pay 38% of the taxes, is that prorated to 38% of societies expenses? After all, the earnings probably came at the expense of some of the other 99% of citizens, even though those citizens might have enjoyed some benefit of the deal or probably, the transaction would not have gone through.

    Make sense?

    d4u

  328. I am not saying life is unfair. And if someone chooses to work 70 hours a week, they can’t turn around and complain life is unfair. You need to stop complaining.

    1. Exactly! Life is very fair. We live in a free world and choose to work as much and make as much as we choose. We have nobody to blame but ourselves for our successes and failures. Thank you for finally understanding what this site is all about!

  329. Sam, you totally miss the point yet again. You can work 70 hours a week and be well-rewarded. I don’t begrudge you that, nor do I expect the same rewards you get for that if I choose to work only 40. But if someone else chooses to work 40 hours per week, why would you ask him (with disdain), “what world do you live in?” You are out of touch if you think most people are working 70 hours a week. (People with children, especially, are usually unable to work those kind of hours even if they wanted to.)

    And if someone is working 70 hours a week at minimum wage, how is he going to educate himself? Seems like a stupid plan to me. A better use of his time would be to work 40 hours and go to college at night so that he can get a better job.

    And please don’t call me comrade.

    1. If someone chooses to work only 40 hours a week, they can’t turn around and complain while life is unfair. That’s my point.

      People need to stop complaining, and start doing.

  330. This argument is totally ridiculous:
    “With wages 3X higher now, I’d be raking in a nice $$1,650 a month or $20,000 a year! Tack on another side job that pays $1,200 a month and I’m in the Top 50%. Anybody can do it!”

    Really? Let’s not talk about where you can find a McDonald that pays $10.5 per hour (more like $7.5 in real world). To make $1,650 a month you have to work 40h/week. To make another $1,200 a month it is another 30h a week. Working over 70 hours a week on a minimum wage job, can you tell me with straight face that you can do it?

    1. The McDonald’s right here in SF is paying $9.8/hr.

      Here is your problem. You think working 70 hours a week is tough. What world do you live in? I have regularly worked 70 hrs a week for the past 12 years.

      1. Sam, Harry is right. Your argument is totally ridiculous You are not working at McDonald’s, and you are not making minimum wage. You are working for a great salary at a job you love. Totally different. You are seriously recommending working 7 days a week 10 hours a day at a minimum wage job for a prolonged period of time and staying sane? You are out of touch and I know you realize it.

        1. You’re right comrade. Hard work and education is overrated. Let’s complain why we deserve better and should only have to work 40 hrs a week. Screw the people working 100 hours a month longer on their work and educating themselves. We deserve the same rewards.

  331. Madhu Reddy

    I believe US is the best country in the world. I cam with $12 from India in 1985, Of course came with Masters degree. Since 1996-2005 Iwas in the top 1% of the income group. From 2006 in the top 5%. I followed Warren Buffet formual and invested small retail business, and real estate. Because of current economic situation little down. I hope all my small business nvestment comes to a profit I can go to top 1%.

  332. Did you see 60 Minutes last night? That same 60 billion figure came up. If all those corporations avoiding taxes by having skeleton “international headquarters” outside the US paid their fair share of taxes, we’d have another 60 billion in revenue. Those corporations are the ones that should feel honored to be doing business in the USA and paying taxes. Hopefully, the tax code can be revamped to encourage them to pay their fair share, and it probably would involve lowering the tax rate for corporations.

    1. I think, taxes should be paid in the country where some profit is made, not where the company is located.

      It can get difficult to compute when a Caribbean Corp. takes an American patent to India or China to produce a product – then, sell that item outside of it’s place of manufacture. Still, if they assess a high cost in India or China to sell to American consumers, to lower their US taxable profit, the product might not have the competitive advantage of being produced in Asia. Thus, the entry cost to America, the place of final consumption would most likely be competitive to other like goods, reflected by a low country of origin cost. A problem might be that India or China might want to have the company show more profit at the manufacture site for their own taxation purposes, raising the export costs, lowering the retail profits. This tax on the manufacturer being an additional benefit to the Asian country besides having the factory there, with satisfied taxable employees in the country of product origin. Today, China has a priority to keep it’s people employed so, low profits are acceptable.

      Today for recourse, a US “Trump” being, if companies don’t assess their costs correctly, a tariff might be assessed so, no dumping.

  333. Joel Charles

    Certainly, you may ask. The answer is complex. Start with a college loan, back in 1961, so that I could get that degree. Next understand that my moral values would not let me default on it, as many of my contemporaries did and then went on to become doctors and lawyers. What’s a default bankruptcy mean, anyway. Then assume that a war came along, and I got lucky, slotted into a reserve Army Unit. Didn’t die or lose a limb in ‘Nam, didn’t even go there. BUT, when you are spending 20 to 25 weekends a year at a reserve unit, not to mention the 6 months active duty for basic training, you don’t save much, and you don’t get much education done. Particularly if you are putting all of your free “discretionary income” into paying the above mentioned student loan. I had a job with an insurance company, salary $4,900 a year plus company car (did not own my own until 1974). Put 2 children into the mix, one w/o benefit of insurance insurance for doctor and delivery, and it becomes much harder to put away the 10% you speak of. You, and all of the other financial gurus I’ve ever read, do not take into account that all apples are not the same shape, color and size and did not fall from the same tree in the same orchard. Some roll downhill. Some lie in puddles of water and rot. Some get eaten by animals, and some get as far as being picked and taken to market.

    I could never put much discretionary income into savings. My fault, I guess. I insisted on buying a car for my wife, so she could work when the children got old enough to go to school. I enjoyed vacations at the lake and paid an average of $800 to $1000 a year to rent a place for two weeks so our family could relax together. I educated my kids to the best of my ability. When I got to where I could save, I was already 45. 10% was about right. I had very little retirement to start with, but we did well, and I had slightly over $200000 when I retired. Of course, things happened to erode that. I won’t bore you with detail, but by the time I had the surgery, several “market adjustments” had eroded my fund to about 75000. The rest went for the surgery, and taxes & fees on early withdrawal. Look, I don’t feel sorry for myself. When one short sheets one’s own bed, one should not complain. I do mind, however, being told that I should just have tried harder to become that multi millionaaire. You have no idea. And it isn’t just you. Many advisors use these cookie cutter formulae to come up with why everyone who is not “lazy” should be rich in America, totally leaving out the randomness of real life. I only ask that you, and others like you, stop telling people how being “conservative” instead of “progressive” is so much better. Real life is real life. If you don’t get breaks (and all you have to do is look at the 50% or so who aren’t getting many lately) on the way up, up dissapears and becomes flat land. When you are on the flat land, getting back into the climb is VERY much harder than people who decry the lower 50% as lazy seem to understand. All I’m asking is that, even if you don’t try their shoes on, stand where they are standing and try to see it from that perspective. Nothing wrong with wanting to be rich. Nothing wrong with being rich. It’s what you do when you get there that you should worry about. Unless one is not at all religious, one is told that from day one in ALL religions. Take a look at the tax returns (which you can’t really do) and see what the average well to do American does with their money…

    1. Joel,

      Have I ever said you were lazy? I really feel your comments stem from some sort of guilt. I’m not a financial guru. You don’t need to be a guru to make have money and create wealth. It’s simply spend less than you earn.

      What I try to “teach” is for people NOT to depend on anybody else or blame anybody else for their situation. Our situations are our own and I don’t believe anybody is not intelligent enough to understand the concept of saving and investing.

      You sound like you are in a swell situation, why? Because all you have to do is ask your kids, whom you say you spend a lot of money and time taking care of, to take care of you.

  334. Joel Charles

    You are living in an alternate universe. Your stats are accurate, your premise is nuts. In one paragraph you suggest that “Half the battle is just moving to a vibrant location such as the San Francisco Bay Area”.

    Look at the real world. A 20 year old non college non highschool graduate working in a resort as a busboy or maid in Tucson AZ can not move to the Bay Area and do well. Sure, they should educate themselves, work hard, etc. Have you ever tried that? Not everyone has the “equal opportunity” you value. I suggest you actually talk to some real “low income non taxpayers” and see how they distribute their income…

    Since they have no medical plan (most low income workers don’t), no real way to “invest” “extra” income (since they have none) and no realistic hope of getting out of the low income rut they are in, you might see how the “bottom 50%” actually lives. One thing is immediately obvious: $35,000 (which is actually far more than “average” for “low income” workers) doesn’t go very far, even when $0 tax is paid.

    On the other hand, looking at the higher end, the average millionaire (AGI) has 65 to 72 percent of their income (a mere $650,000 to 720,000) to live on and play with. How many of them “create jobs”? I’d like to see a study on how many investment bankers, stock traders, hedgefund managers actually employ anyone. Until you do that, you are, sadly, misinformed. Walk in someone elses shoes for a month. Preferably not one of the upper 50%.

    1. Joel, is this where you walk?

      Ive worked for $3/hr, for 40 hours a week for months. I know what it’s like to make little, bust my ass off, and come to the conclusion that education is the only way out of the grind. How about you?

      1. Joel Charles

        You’re still not getting it. The “work hard, go to school and you’ll be a sucess model does not work as well as it used to. Sometimes not at all. THERE ARE NO JOBS. When 1200 people show up for 250 job openings, you are right. The educated get the jobs, the ones who just want to work, any hours, any job, etc. don’t always get them. Yes, I’ve worked for way less than my current 7.52 an hour. Yes, I’m educated, and yes, I’ve worked for LOTS of money in my prime. I’m past my prime. Can’t get (and haven’t been able to get) any work that pays more and offers more than 20 to 30 hours a week, part time, no benefits, no time off (except for when you aren’t working anyway) and your boss makes sure you know you can be replaced tomorrow every chance he gets. I had (uninsured) open heart surgery 5 years ago, recovered, and have been working ever since. I probably will be until I’m 80 or dead. My retirement went to pay for the surgery. So, please don’t lecture me on how hard YOU work. I have worked since I was 14 years old, and am still working at 69. You don’t know, and don’t want to know the circumstances that put me where I am today. I’m happy, but will never be well off. I have a roof, and food and a car and a loving wife. Many Americans are suffering because they don’t have those first two things anymore. If they can’t work, they can’t be consumers. Without consumers this nation will die on the vine. People who make themselves rich moving paper will NEVER understand that. It’s all about moving the paper and making money. THEY DON’T CREATE ANYTHING, AND DON’T CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING. The people who do (or did until the couldn’t recently) aren’t doing it anymore. If nothing is created, the paper being pushed around will become worthless. What then? Will we all be buying and selling gold to each other? Where will people like me get the gold? I don’t have enough left after expenses to BUY gold. In 10 years, if we don’t figure this out, we’ll be living in a society driven by a barter economy. I would wager that you’ve never met anyone who has a master’s degree and can’t find a job that pays more than min wage. I have. Hundreds. Your financial advice is useless to them.

        1. Joel, you are the kind of American who deserves a break. Hardworking, educated, still up against tough odds. I support raising taxes on the top 1% and cutting taxes for the rest of us. here’s why: if I’m making 380k a yr I’m not worrying about buying my kids clothes for school. If I’m in the top 10% making 113k with a family of 4, I’m budgeting like crazy. If I’m farther down the list, I do NOT need to pay ANY taxes because I can’t afford clothes for school. The Top 1% of earners who pay 40% of all US taxes don’t say is that the % they pay relative to their income has decreased while those who can’t afford the clothes have actually had to pay more!

          joel, i’m curious – since the surgery cost has sapped your finances, would the Presindet’s health plan have helped? Would it’s cost have been a burden to you?

        2. Joel,

          I’m sorry to hear about your situation. It is exactly your situation which is why I argue that having a universal healthcare system is GOOD, because genetic diseases and accidents do not discriminate among rich and poor. One shouldn’t die in our country b/c they can’t afford it and vice versa.

          I do want to understand your story more Joel, so feel free to start a new comment/thread as this one has run its course.

          May I ask, if it wasn’t for the the surgery, would you be financially OK to retire? I wonder b/c 55 years of working, saving and investing even just 10% a year would make you a multi-millionaire.

          Thx for more perspective. Sam

  335. The income numbers that you show represent past performance in 10 counties. It is also important to take into consideration factors such as future growth in a country and the stability of that country.

    I would suggest that Canada is one of the best long term choices when choosing where to live. We have an excellent medical system, tons of natural resources, strong banks, good long term economic growth.

    On the down side we do have a higher tax rate, but that is how we pay for our medical system.

    1. Canada is definitely a great choice to move to once I’m retired and no longer earning much money. I would be glad to benefit from the infrastructure and free health care.

  336. Howdy. Just a quick question: where is the flaw in my logic? Let’s say x=cost to deliver product or service, y=price of product or service, c=profit margin so that y-x=c. Whenever c is positive, money flows upwards, the farther to the right of 0 c is, the faster money flows upwards. Is it not logical to conclude that money will eventually be concentrated at the top with minimal amounts at the base? When that happens, does it not force government to redistribute the wealth? And when redistribution gets out of hand, does not that wealth end up flowing out of the economic system in which it was concentrated?

  337. To say that the rich always pay more than their fair share is a bit dishonest. The rich also gains the most from government spending. Take just one simple example. Suppose there were no transportation infrastructure in the country. Economies would then be much smaller and more local. If you were a minimum wage worker at McDonald you are now probably a minimum wage worker on some farm. You didn’t lose much. But if you were a doctor then you are probably no longer a doctor and even if you are you will make less. The doctor stands to lose a lot more with no transportation infrastructure; the doctor may pay more, but the doctor gains much more.

    To say it makes no sense “squeeze” the rich even more because they provide us jobs is also faulty. For a business to work, the business has to have money to invest but the people also have to have money to buy things. Right now the rich have too much of the money and the small consumers don’t have any money to spend. If the millions of small consumers don’t have any money to spends, the low taxes on the rich mean nothing because there is nothing to invest in. That’s what’s happening right now; the rich are sitting on their money. Raising the taxes of rich people and then having the government spend money could get money flowing again. Obviously that is a bit oversimplified but it still holds a truth.

    1. So you are saying if I raised taxes on you, and you were in charge of hiring someone for your company, you would be more inclined to hire someone? Huh? Let me guess, you don’t have your own company or don’t make more than $200,000 as a single person so you have no idea and are just making conjectures.

      I hope I’m wrong and you will correct me.

      1. It just seems so fallacious when I hear the argument that “the affluent pay MORE than there fair share.” and “taxes need to be lower on the upper brackets in order to garner incentive for business to ‘trickle down’ the benefits to the rest.” First, let’s start off by redefining what it means to be wealthy, this is 2011 after all. I agree that a single person running a small business generating only around $250,000 of income shouldn’t be considered “super-wealthy” and categorized in the higher brackets of the tax code.

        However, once we redefine what it means to be wealthy, I believe that the top percentile of income earners should pay around 75% in taxes, as well as eliminating the unfair loopholes and deductions in the tax code that allow people like mutual fund managers and the like to effectively pay less into the system than say, a school teacher. What a lot of people fail to understand is that the progressive tax system is designed to tax one’s ability to generate income the FOLLOWING year. A millionaire has a greater capacity to generate more income next year than a person on the poverty line where the chances of generating more income become increasingly flat lined. As far as businesses are concerned, the trickle down methodology is just plain wrong. These stairs have been carpeted, and when you try to trickle something down, it just gets soaked up at the top. Thus, the aggregation of money that a lot of the corporations are sitting on and paying their heads with while the consumer is suffering. Just look at the 50’s and 60’s when the top rate was 70-92%, we built the interstate, put a man on the moon, stifled communism, built our legendary middle-class, had an education system that was the envy of the world, and our economy was unparalleled. Investment in the country was high. Historically, taxing the rich is not a destructive thing, in fact, quite the opposite. Looking at the present, I choose more taxes.

      2. Your way of dismissing my arguments is a logical fallacy called “argument from authority.”

        The world is just so much more complex then “I’m a business owner and my taxes are down so I’m going to hire.” If every variable is held constant in a standard economy then that will be true. But what about when those other variables are not held constant in a non-standard economy. The world is infinitely complex and there is no magic formula that will work in all circumstances. Might cutting taxes work right now? I am humble enough to say it might. However, I don’t think it will work because taxes are already at their lowest level in like 40 years. Maybe very targeted tax cuts could work. I still think the rich have too much money and that is depressing demand compared to if some of that money was spread out more evenly in society.

      3. Well yup. Spend your profits (taxable income) by investing in your business ( maintain and update your systems and hire employees) or pay taxes. Hoarding the profit is selfish.

  338. what is interesting is that the .0000028579475735239164 percent of the 1 percent has more wealth than the bottom 50 percent. Now we know the bottom 50 are not hoarding any money and we do live in a economy based on consumption. With that would you rather have 400 who have managed to win the monopoly game but won’t restart the game by reinvesting in this country. If you think the rich have it bad with the taxes they pay ,don’t forget they have a little left for lobbyist,attorneys,accountants,tv,radio and newpaper. This all helps to further there cause, please tell me who is furthering yours if you are in the middle class. And I would like some Names of poeple who are working for your INTEREST.

    1. Where’d you get this stat from?

      For those who are wealthy and have the power to hire the rest of us, I certainly wouldn’t try and squeeze them more. What kind of logic is that? We tax cigarettes to prevent people from smoking, or smoke less.

  339. Invest It Wisely

    It seems like companies don`t really hire young people these days, for various reasons. This is a shame as these people are losing the chance to gain valuable work experience which can only help them for the future.

    As for a widening wealth gap, what would happen if there was no spigot of money for people to drink from? I doubt that most of the wealth gap comes from ability and will; instead, a great deal of it is connected to special privilege in some form or another (patent wars which employ expensive corporate lawyers and punish small businesses, complex medical regulations which reward insurance companies, credit expansions by the money monopoly which benefits speculators and hurts ordinary people who are stuck with the bust…)

  340. Wow so your saying if i work 16 hrs a day. I can make it and still be broke if i pay for gas and child support, rent, food.. Iam jus goin to kill myself

      1. Joel Charles

        That is unfeeling. Try working 16 hours a day at 7.50/hr. Do the math (you seem to know math) 7.50X16=120/dayX6 days (give the guy a day off!) = 720/wkX51 weeks = $36,720 annually. Average rent for a studio apt in the Bay Area (low end) is $650X12 mo = $7,800. $36,720-7,800=28,920. Add cost of car, garaging, service $2,000. 28,920-2000=$26,920. Meals, groceries for one (we’ll assume the party is single) $75/weekX52 weeks (no vacation, here) = $3,900. 26920-3900=23020. Social Security and Medicare taxes = 7.65X36720=2809. 23020-2809=20210. -Utility (gas, elect, phone, water) 200/month = 20210-2400=17810. Income tax with standard deduction 36720-5700=31720-(31720X.15)=4758. 17810-4758_13052. So far, our bus boy has earned, net $13,052. Of course, as you said, since he has no life outside work, he has about $1088 per month to “save”. That is, if his car does not break down, his appendix rupture, his teeth go bad, or he doesn’t get mugged on the way to the bank. How does this compare to the guy who has $500,000 left over after paying his executive assistant, secretary, cook and chauffer (assuming he started out with $650,000 of his taxed million and paid $150,000 in creating jobs). If he has an appendectomy in his future, no worries, right? Please, use real life situations, with real people, in your formation of your “outlook”. It’s not socialism to suggest that those who have more pay more. If one is a Jew or a Christian or a Muslim, one’s holy book has told one that “if you have two coats, give one away…” hasn’t it? Has that changed because people “work hard” “get ahead” and “creat jobs?” Wow. God would be pleased that we have edited His Word… Religion as Socialism. Holy cow!

  341. Does this figure re: the top 1% paying 40% of all federal taxes mean in gnereal & is this before all deductions & writeoffs?

  342. It is important to note that the statistics reported include federal income taxes only. To state that 50% of the population pay no taxes is misleading. There are other taxes that individuals pay: (sales tax in most state), excise taxes (on certain goods), state income taxes, and Social Security/ Medicare taxes (for those employed). The burden of Social Security & Medicare taxes which are capped at certain income levels falls heavier marginally on lower and middle income households. (And AGI does not include the tax-exempt income of higher earners).

    So — the conclusion, which is oft repeated, that we need to tax the 50% of taxpayers who are not paying taxes so they have some ‘skin in the game’ really does not follow. And the statement that the highest income earners are paying more than their “fair” share makes a value judgement as to what is “fair”.

      1. I believe it is because all of us aren’t poor…. It is amussing that the people who are most well off in this country like to make an arguement that they are being treated unfair, here we go again with the “little siblings got it better than me” arguement, sorry I dont buy it.

        Would you have us all pay no taxes? You think thats the answer? If you want you want to live in a civilized society then you want to pay taxes. This is not an us (upper 50%) versus the (lower 50%) issue. It is an us (American people) vs them (elected officials allowing our country to be bought so that they can stay n power) issue. Untill this changes it doesnt matter what % you are in, you will be getting screwed….
        Thx
        Thx

      2. Wm. Sweeney

        FS – That is a foolish comment — please read what I wrote. I didn’t say it was ‘ok’ if half of the households don’t pay income taxes. I said that it is misleading to say that almost 50% of households don’t pay taxes. And when it comes down to tax “fairness”, both the ability of someone to pay taxes and the benefits they receive living in a society are important considerations.
        To add a little context, it is also worthwhile to look at how incomes and tax rates have changed over the past 40 years –
        The (pre-tax) average household income of the top 1% increased from $386,900 in 1980 to $1,203,600 in 2008, while the (pre-tax) average income of the bottom 50% of households, by contrast, has declined slightly from $16,100 in 1980 to $15,400 in 2008. (constant 2008 dollars in both cases). At the same time, tax rates for those in in top 1% of household incomes fell. In 1980 they paid 34.5% of their incomes in personal income taxes, and this fell to just 23.3% by 2008.
        There is an avalanche of statistics out there which outlines not only the shift of incomes towards the most fortunate in our society, but also the increased concentration of wealth among the same. We cannot overlook this trend.
        People are entitled to earn what they can earn, but there is a very pragmatic political consideration here — and that is that we cannot sustain either a consumer based economy or a stable democracy if income and wealth are concentrated with the few.

  343. I dont believe everybody could but I do believe most people could. Your statistics in this article do not say how low the bottom 50% have been in that bracket. Many people in the bottom portion do “try harder” (as if thats all it takes) and make it to be one of those lucky ones in the top 50%.

    Being poor everyday is a lot more difficult than paying high taxes on one day in April, regardless of what your effective tax rate is. I would argue that a greater percentage of the income of those whom do not pay any income taxes, goes to taxes in general.

    Depending on how you frame this arguement it is easy to “pick a side” but I believe the problem is generally with those who are making the laws about these tax rates and not the tax rates themselves.

  344. When just the top 20% of the of Americans have 93% (in 2007) of the wealth, these numbers dont seem to outlandish. we have to remember, the bottom 50 are paying taxes, they just aren’t paying income tax. The top 20% are taking in a consederable amount of the benefits of living in this country and IMO that should be reflected in the taxes. That being said, I do like the idea of everyone paying something, maybe we could start with the $50 a month and work progressively back to say $10 or so.

    There is no answer that makes everyone happy but this “I am so rich and I get taxed to much” sounds a lot like “Mommy ,I took the trash out yesterday make him do it now.”

    If people would ask themselves how they can help instead of looking for an enemy or someone to blame, we might be able to get out of this mess intact.

        1. As far as I can tell, collar bones heal in 6 months, then it’s time for him to help mama out.

          Do you not believe anybody can make a good living in the US if they just tried harder?

  345. When I read this article, I feel great disappointment at this propaganda about how the bottom 50% of income earners don’t pay taxes. EVERY single working American pays 7.65% of their income for Social Security & Medicare, oh, unless you make OVER $106,800; then the % paid gets regressively LESS with each dollar earned. A person making $120,000 pays ONLY 6.8%; at $150,000 pays ONLY 5.4%; a person making $1,000,000 PAYS LESS THAN 1% !

    Additionally, all Americans, including the 50% so slandered by statements that they pay NO taxes, pay gasoline tax, taxes on food and clothing, taxes on utilities and telephone bills, they pay fees for driver’s licenses, car tags, marriage licenses, and if they are fortunate enough to own a home, they pay property taxes. AND because most of this group don’t have a huge mortgage, they don’t get to take a tax deduction for their home mortgage interest, when the wealthy are taking tax deductions for million dollar VACATION house, in addition to what they take for their primary residence.

    I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THIS CONTINUOUS HARPING OF HOW THEY RICH PAY MORE THAN THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES. GUESS WHAT, top 5% have 62% of net worth; (top 1% have 35%); top 5% have 72% of financial wealth;(top1% have 43%).

    Of course, top 20% of earners GROSS income was over 60% of all income earned (if you look at AGI – % is, of course, lower, because top earners gobble LION’s share of tax deductions.)

    Because wealthier earners don’t have to spend most of their income just to provide basic necessities for their families (which middle class are required to do as well as low income families,) these wealthy families are able to ACCUMULATE wealth over time and leave it to heirs, who have DONE NOTHING TO EARN IT. Therefore, without progressive tax and public policies, wealth gap just gets bigger and bigger. Witness gap between hard-working Americans and the “fat cats” from 1984-2004 – a DRAMATIC 42% of wealth creation went to top 1%, if you look at top 20%, a WHOPPING 94% of wealth creation flowed to those well-off folks (a big driver of that very un-American phenomenon was due to massive tax cuts, heavily-weighted to wealthy). Now it is very American to financially reward hard work, but does anyone actually believe that the efforts of top 20% of wealthiest Americans contributed so much more in activities that actually contributed to REAL, concrete contributions in America that they deserved 94% of wealth created, with bottom 80%’s contributions were worth only 6% of economic gains? I mean, seriously, the wealthy have not SUDDENLY gotten THST much smarter, if they have, then we need to raise taxes just to address providing adequate education for ALL Americans.

    And not only do the savings that wealthy are able to accumulate contribute to wealth growth, the economic power enables them to get favorable tax policy passed (LOOPHOLES, deductions and actual tax credits) and they can load boards of directors with cronies who allow executive salary packages that are ridiculously high and not based on any logical compensation vs value to company, and with obscene bonuses paid even when company is not successful or if they are fired, they get golden parachutes which guarantee multi-million severance packages.

    SO DO YA STILL THINK THE RICH PAY THEIR “FAIR SHARE”.

    1. Tax deductions are seriously phased out after 100K. I’m talking about Federal taxes here. I know workers pay for other types of taxes.

      Even if the top 1% controlled 90% of all income, if they are paying 95% of all taxes, that’s 5% more than they should no?

      Let’s smooth things out. Nobody is attacking the bottom 50%. The stats are from the IRS themselves. What I’m suggesting is EVERYBODY contribute SOMETHING to Federal income taxes to help our country out in a time of need.

  346. An interesting article I was reading the other day, which states that according to some study, if you earn more than $10,000 per year, you are consuming more than your share of resources on earth.

    You probably know why, only 10%, or less, of world population live in the countries you mentioned. Think of people earning $1 for their days work in 3rd world countries…

  347. knowsbetter

    Wow, 380K a year makes these people the millionaires and billionaires that our President keeps wanting to pillage? If I knew that I was making 25% of what a billionaire makes every year, I’d cry.

    What we need to do is increase the CORPORATE taxes for companies with more than 2K employees and severly cut the tax rate for any company with less that 500 employees. That will create jobs and increase revenues. A graduated fair tax would be perfect.

    1. Well, the split point is a little misleading. Yes, the top 1% group includes everyone with AGI over $380K per year, but if you divide the group’s total AGI by the number of returns, the average AGI for this group is $1,204,247.

      1. Info from the tax foundation:

        “For the past few years, the IRS has also been presenting data on a small
        subset of the top 1 percent, the top 0.1 percent (the top 10 percent of the top
        1 percent). In 2008, this top 0.1 percent filed 140,000 tax returns, reporting
        nearly 10 percent of all adjusted gross income earned …. The average income
        for a tax return in the top 0.1 percent was $6.0 million in 2008.”

      2. This is a great point, which I believe and which more people should know about. Being in the top 1% is all too commonPlace, despite what the definition of 1% declares. We shouldn’t jumble someone making 400k with someone making 2 mil or even $1 mil. It’s a different world.

  348. Sam, we don’t all make as much as you, but remember it’s a progressive tax structure. So the marginal tax rate on my income level is 28%, much higher than the 10% at the lowest level. And I am fine with that, so I think I can understand something Yours is a little higher….33% on what you make between 174K and 379K abd 35%. on the amount you make over 379K. You pay the same taxes on your first 100K as I pay on my 100K.

    Another thing to think about….. think about who those people who pay little to no taxes might be…. the rookie NYPD cop with a family…. the soldier deployed in Afghanistan… your grandmother…..

    1. The rookie cop will be honored to pay taxes. The soldier should have all he deserves and much much more. Grandmothers want to give back.

      Do you see what you are doing though? You are discriminating against people. If we treat people equally, then there would never be any issues.

      We’ve been through so much discrimination in America. You’d think you and others would get the point of freedom and equality by now. I suggest you travel the world and see what discrimation does to societies.

      1. Do you really see it as freedom and equality that 50% of the population is earning less than $33,000 a year?! Could you survive on double that? Poverty is a major problem especially as it becomes inter-generational. You tell these people to pick themselves up by their bootstraps but you need to look at their lives of so many people in poverty and low income areas. Growing up without a father and a mother who has to work two jobs at minimum wage so you can keep your house and eat. There is no extra money. If she gets sick serious problems arise. Since these kids have no father and their mothers are always working they grow up without supervision leading to behavior problems. Most drop out or fail high school. Then they have their own children and the cycle gets even worse. Even if they wanted to, they have no role models. They don’t know how a parent should act. They don’t have the knowledge required to do many things including your start a blog and earn $50,000 example. I seriously doubt that your upbringing was anything like that. Most likely you were a upper middle/lower upper class white kid from suburbia whose parents tried to instill him with a good work ethic by making him work during high school. You then went to college and got a good job afterwards.

        When was the last time you were actually worried that you wouldn’t have enough money to pay the bills? How much money do you have left over every months that you don’t spend on the essentials (shelter, food, utilities) before luxuries (entertainment, eating out, all luxury goods)?

        1. Tell us your story Matt. Do you make less than 33K a year and grew up without a father and mother?

          I’m not worried about paying my $20/month water bill because there is a job opening for $8.50 an hour around the corner that hasn’t been taken for 8 months.

          1. John Mcbroom

            M. Thatcher explains why socialism has never worked perfectly: “evetually you run out of other people’s money”

        2. Sam, it doesn’t matter whether or not Matt is making less than 33K and whether he grew up without a father or mother. I am making about 100K, and I grew up with 2 loving parents, thank God. But I have the ability to see what goes on outside my own little universe.

          Matt is exactly right. There are many, many, people who do not start off life on an equal footing. For you to pretend that they have had the same equal opportunity you or I have had is just plain not true.

    2. Janna, it’s pretty clear you don’t make much, and what income you are paying at 28% is probably a miniscule amount. It’s pretty silly to argue how much others pay or how others feel if you have no idea.

      Sam is right. Equality is the best way. We shouldn’t treat people more special or less special. We have a choice to do whatever we want in the US.

      1. Thanks, Genius. The United States has a long history of a progressive tax structure, usually much much more progressive than it is now, and somehow it has served us. But thanks foryour condescending comment.

      2. And, Genius, while I may not make “much”, I still fall roughly within the top 10%, which just goes to show how out of touch you must be.

    1. the marginal tax rate on my income level is 28%, much higher than the 10% at the lowest level. And I am fine with that, so I think I can understand something Yours is a little higher….33% on what you make between 174K and 379K abd 35%. on the amount you make over 379K. You pay the same taxes on your first 100K as I pay on my 100K.

      Another thing to think about….. think about who those people who pay little to no taxes might be…. the rookie NYPD cop with a family…. the soldier deployed in Afghanistan… your grandmother…..

  349. Roger, the Amateur Financier

    Readers, after looking at these statistics, what jumps out most at you?

    I’d have to say, how close the brackets are. I would have guessed you needed a significantly higher income to break the top 10%, let alone the top 5% or 1%. I guess it shows that you can be solidly middle class and still earn more than the vast majority of people in this country. I don’t whether that’s a good thing (not that hard to move up the ranks!) or a bad thing (most people are earning such a low income that with even a modestly high income, you can still out-earn 90+% of the people in our rich country).

    Do you feel more lucky or less lucky to be an American and make what you do?

    I’ve always felt pretty lucky to be an American, and a modern American, to boot. As a nearsighted, physically out of shape, prone to allergies person, I realize full well that I would have been much worse off in most places in the world and most times throughout history. With few exceptions, I’d probably have died young in most other places and times. That said, particularly seeing as my income as a grad student puts me in that Bottom 50%, I can definitely see room for improvement in my earning. (That’s one reason why I find myself in graduate school, after all.)

    Do you think you’ll ever be able to move into the Top 5% or Top 1% of income earners in America?

    Eh, maybe. I’m likely to earn around $60k-70k with my graduate degree (assuming I can find a job in my field and work in said field for a while to build up my income), which combined with a hopefully much more robust income from blogging or other side income (to say nothing of Sondra’s income once we are married), might be enough to push me (us) into top 5% territory. Here’s hoping.

    (I don’t have much to say about income tax rates and fairness that I haven’t already shared in your article about the Flat Tax or that aren’t shared elsewhere in these comments, so I won’t bother. Well, maybe a little: until we come up with a universally agreed upon definition what is ‘fair’ in the context of taxes, we’re not going to see any agreement between those who think the tax system should be more progressive and those who think it should be flatter. Arguing that the rich (and who are we considering the rich, here? Top 10%, Top 1%, Top 0.01%? And do we look at income, net worth, or some other measure of ‘rich’?) will ‘always pay more than their fair share’, as you do, depends on what we consider ‘fair’. Should they pay more than the ‘average’ earner because America provided them an opportunity to earn more? Should they pay the same proportion as lower earners, so as not to punish them for success? Should we try (as we have) to have a tax system that encourages people to use their money in a particular way, or should we simplify the tax system, even at the cost of, say, decreasing charitable giving and obtaining higher education? I’m pretty sure that even reasonable, well-educated, and compassionate people could disagree on these issues, to say nothing of the dopes who tend to hold elected office…)

  350. “Living in San Francisco, it really feels like most are in the top 5% of income earners ($159,619), if not top 1% ($380,354). ”

    Really? Even if you live in SF, you only have to walk or drive around a bit to realize this is way far from true.

    1. Are you questioning how I feel? I know the stats don’t bear this out and is not the case, but this is how I feel.
      The average starting income package for a 29 year old out of Haas or Stanford MBA is about $130-150,000. What happens when they work after a couple years and are 31? That’s right.

  351. Although I fall in the top 50% I’d like to make it to the top 25% in the next two years and then the top 5% at least within ten years. I think it’s doable. I think the tax conversation is a sensitive subject but the IRS is basically creating incentive to earn more which supports our capitalist society. And when you think about it, many top earners or net worth individuals give back to the community or charities so they do take the time to redistribute their wealth on their own terms.

    1. Hmmm, based on higher tax rates the more you make, I think the govt and IRS incentivizes people to make only up to around 200-250k/yr and then stop/start evading. 250k still is a good income though of course.

      Good luck in your goals!

  352. First of all, the intent I was talking about is from radio talk show hosts like Sean Hannity, not you nor the IRS. It was Sean’s statement that made me google “how much money do the top earners make” and find this article.

    Second of all, WHO is voting to raise taxes on people who aleady pay taxes when they don’t pay taxes? Are some congressmen not paying taxes??? Isn’t that who votes on raising taxes?

    Third, you certainly CAN pay no income taxes if that’s what you really want. Just lose your job!

    “Mean”?? ? “Hypocritical?” “Unkind”?? Seriously? Most people who have lost their jobs are not merrily going along paying no taxes! They would be happy to have a job so they could pay taxes! And a lot of people currently out of work used to have good jobs and paid a lot of taxes. Don’t think that this can’t happen to any one of us.

    I’m sure you have worked hard to get to where you are. Be happy for that!! Don’t focus on complaining on how much more taxes you pay than someone who makes one tenth of what you make. It doesn’t become you. Calling those people mean, unkind and hypocritical makes you sound whiny.

    1. Sorry, I should have known you came from Sean Hannity, my bad. You don’t know which party is voting on raising taxes? If not, can’t help you. People vote for congressmen.

      Please revisit the title of the post to discover the meaning of the post. I’m just entertaining you bc it’s fun. I’m all for free riding and not paying taxes as you believe. Rich people should pay for my families benefits. I understand it’s increasingly becoming the American way. Therefore, you shouldn’t feel guilty for not paying your fair share.

  353. What bothers me is not that there is income inequality. It is radio talk show hosts that claim that 50% of the people pay only a small percentage of the total tax bill (2.7% according to this article) without ever revealing that they are only earning 12.75% of all income. Their intention is to get people who don’t think it through outraged by this, when in fact, if they had all the facts they may or may not agree. To me, for the top 87% of income to be taxed 97% of the total tax bill is fine, even though it’s not a flat percentage.

    And Sam, what makes you think that “most of us” weren’t making full-time incomes in the 80s and 90s??? Most of us baby-boomers were making full-time incomes in the 70s!!

    1. The chart is from the IRS, so there’s really no intent there, unless the IRS has some intent… which is to broaden the tax collection in America.

      I’m not outraged. Heck, if I can pay net 0 federal income taxes, I would too. I just wouldn’t be so mean as to vote to raise taxes on people who already pay taxes when I don’t pay taxes. Don’t you think that’s a little hypocritical and unkind? I would just be merry and tell nobody, and certainly not complain.

      Based on the demographics data for readers on this site, 70% of the visitors here are 25-40. If one has worked since the 70s and 80s, it’s rare here as not may are in the 50-70 range. Hence, most of us weren’t making full-time income in the 80s at least. Part-time maybe, not full time.

  354. Hunter @Mapblog.net

    I don’t like the fact that government workers make more then private sector workers and produce less.

    1. I dont know where you get your information, however government workers on average DO NOT make more than there Private sector counterparts. A lawyer for example:

      Salary
      All graduates

      $68,500
      Private practice
      108,500
      Business 69,100
      Government 50,000
      Academic/judicial clerkships 48,00

  355. We are actually very lucky in America not only because our median income is the highest in the world but because the chances an average person will make good income is higher compared to many other countries.

    Some of these places in the top 10 (like Singapore or Hong Kong) might have a high median income but much of that is controlled by a small percentage of people. I know this is the same everywhere in the world but if you think income inequality is bad in the U.S., you might want to live in a few more places to really see how good we have it over here.

      1. Tell that to an uneducated poor person working two jobs or more for 8.00 an hour
        each and is living from paycheck to paycheck. Are you going to tell him to stop eating
        for about 4 years and go to college to get a better job.?

  356. So then nothing but a flat tax is fair to you? In that case, as Jeremy points out, the FICA maximum should be eliminated so that everyone is taxed a flat FICA rate as well.

  357. @Sam Let me try this one more time. You are missing the point. The top 50% pay 97% of the federal taxes because we make 87% of the income. That relative tax burden does not seem disproportionate to me. Does it to you?

    1. Of course it does. You just said so in your sentence. If the top 50% earned only 87% of the income, why is the top 50% paying 97%? That 10% should be split by those in the bottom 50%, who benefit from Federal spending as well.

  358. I’m not really sure how you expect me or anyone to answer a question about “equality” if you don’t define it. It means different things to different people. For some people it means you divide the revenue needed for a balanced budget by the number people able to work and everyone pays the exact same $$$ amount. For some people it means a flat tax %. For some it means that if your income bracket earns 20% of the total income you should be responsible for 20% of taxes. Those arn’t all of the definitions people have of course and they are all very different but they all have some “equality” in them. Except for my last sentence in my original post about class mobility nothing else was about what’s fair and what’s not. If you want to know why I agree/disagree with your definition of “equality” define it for me and I’ll be happy to.

    As to your first question about what my point was. You picked virtually the only progressive tax that people pay in the country and used the statistics from that one tax as a starting point for a debate. My point was that you picked one tax out of many (the one that most agrees with your point of view) and act as if every tax works exactly the same way. Then despite the fact that you admit income tax isn’t the only federal tax and everyone pays them, (not to mention you completely ignore the fact that they’re regressive) in the same sentence you again imply that that 50% of people pay for all federal taxes.

    “Are you saying just because you pay state taxes and stuff it’s OK not to pay Federal Taxes and vote for the government to raise Federal taxes on people who already pay all the taxes? huh?”

    You and a lot of people seem to be under the impression that there has been some sort of assault on the top tax brackets in this country. The last time taxes on the top tax brackets were really raised? the nineties. Before that? before I was born. My entire life besides one small increase under Clinton tax rates have been falling at the top tax brackets while effective rates for the middle class have gone up. I fall slightly below the top 25% in the income brackets you posted. While that doesn’t put me in the group that’s seen their effective tax rate go up the most in the last 30 years, I’m right below them.

    If you want to have a real debate about tax policy that’s great but don’t start it with cherry picked statistics. No one likes people that use welfare money for drugs, sell their food stamps or that work off the books, drive a Cadillac and receive aid. No one wants to pay for a women that has 10 kids before she’s 30 with no way to pay for them. That stuff makes everyone mad and the vast majority of people (including democrats) that vote don’t like those people either.

    1. It doesn’t matter if tax rates were higher in the 80s or 90s. Most of us weren’t making full-time incomes then. What matters is now.

      Equality is when everyone contributes something to help the common cause. To work together to better the greater whole.

      Is there reason why you are against everyone paying Federal Taxes because you currently aren’t paying? I’d love to understand your disposition more.

      Tx

      1. @Sam – it’s hard to get worked up over your cry for “equality” when you realize the reason the top 50% pay 97% of the federal taxes is that they make 87% of the income! I still find it strange that you are so fixated on the lowest income earners paying more taxes, especially in view of how much money you say you make!

        1. How much money do I make? Most of us started with nothing and had to work for it.

          Until we can empower people with education and belief they can achieve, we will find it difficult to achieve equality. The poor don’t want a handout. The poor want an opportunity.

  359. I was just googling some statistics and came across this article so I’m not sure if anyone is going to even read this but you made some points that I have a real problem with.

    “You can also see that the Top 50% of tax payers pay practically all of the nation’s taxes (97.30%), which once again shows that 40-45% of American income earners pay zero taxes.”

    “Ok, so even though the highest income earners pay a higher effective tax rate and a mug large absolute tax amount, you still want to tax them more even though half the working American population pays nothing? ”

    “Are you missing the point of the article, which is simply to highlight how much people make? 45% of income earning Americans pay no taxes. Don’t you think that’s wrong?”

    No one disagreed with you on these points which Is unfortunate. You keep saying that half of the population pays no taxes which is completely false. It’s true that about half don’t pay “income taxes”. Fed income taxes are just one of the many taxes everyone pays.

    I won’t even get into state/local/excise taxes that everyone pays and I’ll stick to fed taxes. You seem to ignore that the fed takes in as much revenue from FICA as they do from income taxes. FICA is paid by everyone at an equal % rate unless you make over 108k (number might be slightly off but it’s pretty close). After that cutoff rate you’re effectively paying a lower percentage of your income. Someone making $1 mil pays the same as someone making $100k. That’s called a regressive tax but we all seem to ignore that about half of the feds tax revenues come from a regressive tax.

    If you look at real effective tax rates taking into account all taxes paid and not just cherry picking one tax out of many you find that that people making roughly 80-100k pay the highest tax rates. In other words the tax system is progressive for a while (up to 100kish) and then it’s flat/regressive.

    Sorry to rant…I just hate this 50% argument….One last point, if the tax code punished the wealthy as much as people think the wealth gap in this country wouldn’t be widening. In fact if that idea was right it would be narrowing or remaining stable.

    1. Ummm, the people who pay Federal income tax also pay state, sales, FICA, employment tax too. Whats your point? Are you saying just because you pay state taxes and stuff it’s OK not to pay Federal Taxes and vote for the government to raise Federal taxes on people who already pay all the taxes? huh?

      Why do you not believe in equality and have everyone pay some Federal Income taxes?

      1. They don’t make enough. If you make them pay taxes they can’t afford, They’ll just
        call it quits and go on welfare and you can then pay Uncle Sam for their entire income

  360. I have worked hard all my life and made my own success. I have done well in my chosen field and have achieved a compensation level in the area of the top 3% according to the statistics provided here. As such I pay what I will call my share of taxes. The problems I have is with those who, like many construction and other small businesses, do business off the books to keep from paying taxes, and those who are simply too damn lazy to work period and choose to milk the system, lay around watching TV and do prescription drugs while complaining how things just aren’t fair. F them. You make your own successes in this country, your own failures as well. If more people worked for a living we would have much more in the top 50% paying their share.

    1. @Jerry – I totally agree with you on having a problem with those who do business off the books to avoid taxes. Also, I have a problem with a company like GE paying no taxes. Although I’m sure there are people out there who are too lazy to work, right now there are many, many people who would love to work if there were any jobs. Not sure what you mean “we would have much more in the top 50% paying their share”. We will always have the same number of people in the top 50% if the population numbers stay the same. If there were more jobs and more higher-paying jobs available, we might see more people at all levels, including the bottom 50%, earning more and therefore, paying more taxes.

    2. The best part of your comment is “We make our own successes in this country.” Heck, you can even start a blog in your underwear and make over $50,000 a year in a couple years. Seriously, there is so much opportunity in America!

  361. I always like to tell my kids (the ones, if I believed statistics, I couldn’t afford and thus should not have had): “This just in: LIFE NOT FAIR. More at 11:00.”

  362. I think the debated topic is an odd one. Whether the top 1 percent ot the lower 50 pecent comes up with an additional 60 billion dollars of tax money, it is clear to see by recent events that it would amount to 60 billion dollars wasted by our elected officials. Let them cut wasteful spending instead of talking about tax increases. Any idiot can decide increased tax will solve a financial problem. In disclosure, I make 140k. I pay enough taxes and do not want to pay anymore. If there was any inkling of hope that increased taxes wouldn’t amount to more wasteful spending, then I would be open to the idea.

    1. NOBODY is proposing someone earning only $140k should pay ONE DIME MORE in taxes (unless you are using tax loopholes and earning millions but using those loopholes, deductions or tax credits to lower your AGI to $140k).

      Dems are just proposing that tax rates be raised only on individuals making over $200k and families making over $250k (well actually, it is really only letting Bush tax cuts expire by 1/1/13). This would return those higher income folks to Clinton tax rates. Heck, I only make $60k and my hubby makes $40k and I would be glad to have our tax rates raised back to Clinton levels if we could erase W.Bush economic meltdown ! !

        1. Wow, the more I read this stuff, the more I realize how much life experience you still need. When I was in my 20s, I regularly worked 60 hours for YEARS. I could never have done it as a mother and wife. Anthropologists have stated that a human being is meant to work 20 hours per week (hunter/gather lifestyle). I will add that it probably takes a toll on you physically as well as mentally and would not doubt that it is responsible for divorce and
          obesity (cortisol, irregular meals, etc). Maybe that’s why Europeans are a bit healthier,?

          Please Samuri, have an open mind. You can still be stubborn.

          I now work part time freelance, attend a state university and care for my husband, child and home (as well as our finances). We are in the 2% and I consider myself blessed everyday.

          It was much easier when I did not have a child (school events, his homework, lessons, etc.).

  363. “I remember making $550 a month just working at McDonald’s for $3.50/hour, 20 years ago. With wages 3X higher now, I’d be raking in a nice $$1,650 a month or $20,000 a year! Tack on another side job that pays $1,200 a month and I’m in the Top 50%. Anybody can do it!”

    Only someone completely out of touch with reality would make such a statement. You go out there and work 70 hours a week and see how much you manage to save, and god help you if you get sick.

    1. That’s your problem. You think 70 hours a week is a lot. When you realize 70 hours a week is COMMON, then you will realize why making in the top 50% is easy if you put in the effort. I work about 60 hours a week during my day job and 20-25 hours a week online, and it’s been like this for 2 years. I’m not complaining at all. That’s standard to me.

      What are you doing?

      1. Sam – you are probably single and love your job, and the 20-25 hours a week you spend online on your website is arguably “working”. In that case, if that’s what you want to do, it may be healthy FOR YOU. However, when you advise others that it is “easy” to work at McDonald’s 70 hours a week, I agree with Scott that you are showing that you are out of touch with reality. Most McDonald’s workers, I would venture to say, do not LOVE their job and may have families they need or want to spend time with. And Sam, if you ever do get married and have a family, please cut back on your work hours for the sake of your marriage and your kids. (you know, that whole work/life balance thing…)

        1. @Sam – I have never worked at McDonald’s, but I worked in a local fast food restaurant in college. I worked very hard there. I am currently working 40 hours a week at a professional job that I like, but I have at times worked 50 hours or more, either at one job or two jobs. I recently quit my second job because I realized what I was making was less than what those hours in my life were worth. I am a firm non-believer in people working 60-70 hours a week unless it is something you truly enjoy, or if you have your own business, in which case it’s probably a necessity. Or if you are doing it on a short-term basis like a big project at work coming to a head, or to save up for something big. But if you are working for someone else and regularly working 60-70 hours a week in order to get ahead, you may end up in several years wondering where your life went. If your income is high enough, I would consider that you have been compensated for all your hours (even though it may or may not be worth what you are giving up), but it really hurts to see people working their butts off for a company who’s really just taking advantage of them. The sad thing is that in this economy, companies can find people who will work those hours without additional compensation in order to have/keep a job. Free labor for the company! But nothing is free… somebody always pays… and you know who it is.

  364. Just to clarify – this is data for tax year 2008 and the moniker “individual” tax return includes single as well as couples, and there is no distinguishing the two as the stats are commingled. Note that many in the bottom are retirees, part-time workers, children that have income from trusts or other sources usually from mom and dad, and all the other low income earners. It is tough to use these stats alone to determine policy related to taxes – there are many more layers and complexities.

    I want the country to strike a balance. Higher earners should shoulder more of the burden, but lower income earners should not pay little to nothing. Especially those who have little income out of circumstance (trust fund kid) rather than necessity (minimum wage earner supporting a family).

    I am in the top category by earnings and think we need to do something that increases the burden across the board. Simply raising taxes on the high earners rings unfair, although a higher burden on the upper income earners may be palatable.

  365. I may be wrong, but I think you’re young and haven’t seen as much as you think you have. Be happy you are doing well enough to pay the taxes that you do. (btw – what is your AGI and your effective tax rate?) When you were earning 15K at McDonald’s, were you on your own supporting a family? Not that I wish this on you because I definitely don’t… But to parody you, when things change and you find yourself a single mom or dad struggling to raise your family on 20K a year, pls let me know and we can have a balanced argument. Trust me when I say if you knew how it felt, you would be more compassionate.

    Do you have any idea how many hard-working men and women have lost their jobs by decisions made by people in the top 1% to make the companies they work for “lean and mean” by outsourcing their jobs to other countries, so that they can make their multi-million dollar bonuses and move on?

    Your condescending attitude towards me leads me to believe you effectively dismis 90% of the population. .. Or maybe 99%… Regardless of what you think, you and the rest of the top 1% are not the only ones with “skin in the game”.

    Believe me, I have seen enough to know that if I were making 380K or 20 million dollars, I would be happy to pay an effective tax rate of 25%. It would still leave me with plenty left over.

    Just out of curiosity, what would you think about having EVERYONE pay an additional $25 per month, instead of trying to get $50 only from the bottom 50%? You would raise the same $50-60 billion (your figures – I didn’t check them) and put everyone’s skin in the game?

    1. Why am I not compassionate for fighting for equality?

      You do realize there are plenty people who don’t make much and still pay because they believe it’s an honor to help everyone right? We all need to pitch in to helP others and I’m disturbed why you don’t believe in helping our economy and our brothers and sisters out. We are in such a hole.

  366. I actually fell somewhere between the top 10% and the top 25% last year. My AGI was about 93K. In 2009, my AGI was about 110K, which probably put me in or close tp the top 10% for that year. In 2009, my effective federal tax rate was 13.51%. You will see that the top 10% pays an average of 18.71%, which probably ranges from about 12% for the lower end of the spectrum to about 24% at the higher end. As you will see in one of my prior posts, I would be in favor of raising taxes on the higher 50% rather than on the lower 50% because if they earn less than 33K, they can hardly afford to pay more taxes. On the other hand, I, earning 90-110K, can afford to pay a little more. And YOU, assuming you are in the tp[ 1%, earn move than 380K, and yet you are whining about having to pay a little more and want the gpverment to get the money from people making one tenth of what you make.
    Also, what I said previously applies to you apparently. You assume I earned under 60K “based on the charts”. I’m not sure where you got that from the chart, but your assumption was incorrect.

    The people in the top 1% average AGI is over a million dollars ($1,204,247). At the bottom end of the top 1%, people are earning 380K. At the top – unlimited.
    The people in the bottom 50% average AGI is $15,354. At the bottom end of the bottom 50%, people earn 0. At the top – $33,048. Presumably, this is where the people that pay no taxes fall.

    You state ” All we have to do is make the bottom 50% who pay no taxes pay just $43 a month in taxes and we’d raise $60 billion a year right there. ” I still maintain, as I said before, if you need to tax either the bottom 50% or the top 50% an extra $43 per month, tax the top 50%, which includes me. I could live with it, and I am guessing you could too. But if I were making 15K per year, it would be a real hardship.

    1. Yes, I suggest people in the bottom 50% still pay Federal Taxes to have skin in the game. Even if they paid just $50 a month, that would be good and raise $50-60 billion in revenue a year.

      90-110K is a fine salary, it’s just not close to getting to the effective absolute and percentage tax rates of the highest tax bracket. Trust me when I say if you knew how it felt, you’d believe more in equality and having everyone pitch in. When I was earning just 15K/year at McDonald’s, I felt it my duty to pay taxes and pitch in. I didn’t want anybody to treat me special. I wanted an opportunity to achieve.

      1. You need to do some more research. The lower 50% does not pay 0 in taxes. The cut off for not paying taxes is $5000.00. If you make more than that (AGI) you have to pay taxes. Even people working at McDonalds have to pay income tax. Yes they may get some back at the end of the year when they file but not until then. I average about 100k/ year. Yes I see a need to raise taxes on the upper 50%. I may not like it but it is needed. You spouted off about how a person makin minimum wage could get a second job to raise their income. Man you are stupid. Now they are working two full time jobs. I would like to see you work two full time jobs. I have done it and it sucks. No time for family or anything. Just work to make ends meet. Everyone in the top 50% forget that thier quality of life is so much better than the lower 50%.

        1. I work two jobs and have time for friends, family, sports. Your point?

          I love how people who make 100K start getting all righteous. Do me a favor, and send the IRS more of your money in taxes and help the country out. If you don’t, then you’re just wasting people’s time.

  367. I don’t know what is going on with my post… Change that sentence to: “I would be in favor of raising taxes on the higher 50% rather than on the lower 50% because if they earn less than 33K, they can hardly afford to pay more taxes, whereas I, earning 90-110K can affford to pay a little more. And YOU, assuming you are in the top 1%, earning more than 380K, and yet you are whining about having to pay a little more and want to get the money from people making one tenth what you make.”

    BTW – I thnk I figured out the technical difficulties in my post. I used the symbols for “less than” and “greater than”, and for some reason, it removed all the words between those symbols!

  368. There was a typo in my last post. Correction#2: I actually fell somewhere between the top 10% and the top 25% last year. My AGI was about 93K. In 2009, my AGI was about 110K, which probably put me in the top 10% for that year. In 2009, my effective federal tax rate was 13.51%. You will see that the top 10% pays an average of 18%, which probably ranges from about 12% for the lower end of the spectrum to about 24% at the higher end. As you will see in one of my prior posts, I would be in favor of raising taxes on the higher 50% rather than on the lower 50% because if they earn 380K, and yet you are whining about having to pay a little more and want to get the money from people making one tenth of what you make.
    Also, what I said previously applies to you apparently. You assume I earned under 60K “based on the charts”. I’m not sure where you got that from the chart, but your assumption was incorrect.

  369. I always laugh when I hear people claim, with outrage, that the top 1% of earners pay 38%, 50%, 67% or whatever% of all taxes paid by everyone. As everyone knows, statistics can be very misleading, often intentionally by the person citing them. But sometimes, the person citing them may not even understand them. Imagine a society in which there are a hundred people, and one person earns 20 million dollars. The other 99 people earns zero dollars. Flat tax rate of .000005%. The one person pays 1 dollar in taxes. The rest of the people pays zero dollars in taxes. And the top 1% of the earners is paying 100% of the taxes! And the bottom 99% pay 0% of all taxes! My point is that when you claim the top 1% pays whatever, it means absolutely nothing without looking at the total picture.

    1. So you don’t believe the stats from the IRS?

      I believe the reports when i file my taxes hoe much money I’m paying in taxes, bc it’s not staying with me!

      What is your effective tax rate?

      1. I do believe the stats from the IRS. Thats’s not the point. You state that the top 1% of earners pay 38% of the total taxes. So what??? Without looking at how much people at the top, middle, and bottom earn (and everything in between), it means nothing. What % of the total tax bill should they pay? Should they pay 1% of the total taxes? That’s how much they would pay if every person paid an identical dollar amount of taxes, regardless of income. (eg. if every person paid $1000 in taxes). Is that what you think would be fair?
        In answer to your question – my federal effective tax rate last year was 12.05% (checking my 2010 Federal tax return records). What is yours?

        1. Are you missing the point of the article, which is simply to highlight how much people make? 45% of income earning Americans pay no taxes. Don’t you think that’s wrong?

          The reason why you are don’t understand is simply because you are paying such a low rate. Of course you don’t really care, because you’re paying 12% and earning under 60K a year most likely based on the charts. I hope you’re not the type who votes for others to pay more taxes, without paying more yourself.

          When you get to the highest effective tax rates in the chart, pls let me know, so we can have a balanced argument. Seriously, I don’t understand your rant, nor can I take you seriously if you have never experienced more than a couple marginal tax brackets. I’m not saying we should all pay the same absolute amount, I’m saying we should all have SKIN IN THE GAME and at least pay a similar percentage i.e. flat tax.

        2. Then you factor in the flat-tax factor of taxing on purchases. THAT is where the lower half pays a higher percentage of their income. When counting what people pay to their governments, forgetting that when you sock money into savings, etc you don’t pay additional taxes because you don’t spend it. How much food, household goods, entertainment expense, etc is purchased kind of flattens out as income gets higher, while savings grows. Sure, it’s a State/Local tax … but without it, a larger burden would be put onto income taxes, even at the federal level as governments attempt to balance things out between each other. Practically all of the AFTER income tax income of the bottom 50% is taxed. A much lower percentage of the top 5%’s actual income (not AGI because that isn’t actually a good representation of income with all the loopholes available as an individual’s income gets higher) actually gets hit with those taxes. Here the tax rate is at about 10% between State and Local. On a $33,000 income, that’s $3,000 give or take. How much of your income do you actually spend? What’s the absolute% of taxes paid on your net income (never mind AGI)? Things even out a bit better when you step back and look at the whole picture rather than a single tax. Singling out the Federal government when the states depend on it, and the local depend on the state … and all go in the opposite direction as well, creates a false image.

          Having lived at anywhere between $6,000 income and $35,000 income all my life so far, I can say that taxing an extra $43 is $10 per week. That’s 2 gallons of milk my kids don’t drink, or medicine I can’t buy, or the trip to school if (God forbid) my daughter has another seizure there. For the top $50% it might be a movie they don’t watch or a dinner they don’t eat at a restaurant. I don’t GO to restaurants. I don’t GO to the movies. My kids do the free stuff … local parks, local community center pools, play with the neighborhood kids. We already consolidate trips to town. I pay $20.00 every 3 months for an emergency cell phone that has no frills. My kids wear their clothes til they’re worn out. Then we buy “new” ones at Goodwill. Yep. Taxing people more at lower incomes actually discourages productivity and cuts down on what actually powers the economy … the fact that the bottom half SPENDS all their income, moving that income back into the economy to be earned by someone else and spent again kind of makes decreasing their income counter-intuitive to solving economic problems. It doesn’t matter how much is produced if you don’t have consumers to buy. One person keeping an extra 30,000 on top of the 300,000 they is going to spend a tiny portion of it if any. 1,000 people with an extra 30 on top of the 30,000 they have are going to spend it, creating more income for businesses, and driving the economy further. If that income is regular, it’s a more stable repair. Which should be the goal of the governments in question, and the purpose of balancing taxes.

          I apologize for any incoherency or jumps in thought. I’ve been going back and forth making supper :)

  370. keith gallagher

    you miss the point of raising $60,000,000,000 by getting bottom 50% to pay a -mere- 43/month. how about raising $60,000,000,000 by asking the top 1% to pay an extra ~300 a month [3,600/year] ? it wouldn’t even raise the effective rate at that income level!!! this is why a graduated tax [tax according to ability to pay] is fair. flat rates are regressive and hurt the weakest the most.

    1. Do you seriously believe that it’s fair that half of Americans don’t pay federal taxes even though they benefit from te same federal services? What is your effective tax rate?

      Dont you believe in equality.

      1. How about because more than half of the people in this country don’t make much.
        And they don’t benefit nearly as much from infrastructure and other gov’t services as
        the wealthy corporations do.

      2. Sandra Howerton

        Yes, it is fair that the bottom 50% do not pay income taxes because they are struggling to get by. The bottom 50% in this country control only 2.5% of the wealth. And the bottom 50% are still paying taxes, such as sales, excise, property, state and local, Social Security, and Medicare–taxes that are extremely regressive because lower income people pay a higher percentage of their incomes in those taxes than higher income people do. The progressive nature of the federal income tax is supposed to compensate somewhat for the regressive nature of those other taxes, but it does not compensate completely for it. That’s why Warren Buffet’s cleaning lady and secretary pay higher total tax rates than he does.

        What is NOT fair is that those who are benefiting most from our plutonomy and who can afford to pay more in taxes are paying lower rates than they have since the 1920s. And those lower rates are NOT resulting in more job creation. If they were, we would have had an increase in job creation since the Bush tax cuts went into effect. Instead we have had a decrease. The rich are simply NOT paying anywhere near their fair share for a system that only they have benefited from for most of the last thirty years–since Reagan instituted the failed “trickle down” policy of lower taxes and less regulation that led eventually to the financial crisis.

        Even with the lower earners paying no federal income tax, we have the greatest wealth inequality in the industrialized world. Our ranking is even worse than that of some third-world countries. We have also moved in the last thirty years from a high score in social mobility to a low score–lower than Canada and most of the European nations. The gap between the rich and the rest has become a national disgrace–along with our crumbling infrastructure and lack of universal access to high quality health care. All of these problems can be solved, but not as long as the GOP makes keeping taxes low for its wealthy overlords its highest priority and insists on just doubling down on the failed policies (low taxes for the wealthy and deregulation) of the last thirty years.

        We need to put unemployed construction workers back to work repairing and building schools, highways, bridges, pipelines, the electric grid, the broadband system, etc. We need research and development of green energy and other innovative technologies. We need world-class public education to prepare the workers of tomorrow. However, we will never get anything this country really needs if people keep putting backward Tea Party Republicans in office. All we will get is disastrous cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all programs that help the poor and the middle class–and more welfare for the rich and corporations in the form of subsidies, credits, tax loopholes, and low tax rates. As long as money is able to play the leading role in our politics, as it does now, yahoos who do not respect workers, scientific knowledge, or the egalitarian principles that made this country great in the past will continue to win enough elections to stop our problems from being solved.

        1. But the rich weren’t alive in 1920 to pay those income tax levels. All they know is what they know over their working lives, which can’t be much more than 40 years.

          According to the chart by the IRS in this post, the bottom 50%’s group share of AGI is 12.75%. Where do you get 2.5%?

        2. Sam, I don’t understand your point about the rich not being alive in 1920. What Sandra is saying is that the rich historically have paid much higher rates than they are currently paying. So, if all they know is the rates they have been paying over the past 40 years, they should be happy to now be paying such a relatively low rate.

          The bottom 50% make 12.75% of the income, but have only 2.5% of the wealth (net worth). (With these low tax rates for the rich, the rich get richer…) The top 1% controls 35% of the wealth. The top 10% controls over 70%. And over the past few years as wealth has declined, it has declined at a greater rate for the bottom groups.

          In 1980 CEOs made 42 times the pay of the average worker. The top federal marginal tax rate was 70%. in 2010 CEOs made 343 times as much as the average worker. The top marginal tax rate 35%. And yet you continue to say we are “heading towards socialism”… Where do you get that?

          1. It’s pretty simple. Because 1) America taxes income, not wealth, and 2) the rich weren’t alive in 1920 so therefore they never knew what it was like paying that level. It’s like saying people now should all go back to writing letters sent by Zeppelins. It’s irrelevant. What we know is what we know in our working lifetimes.

            Can you come back and figure out what the income levels were for those top marginal tax rates then? That would be an interesting discussion. The policies put in place moves us back towards Socialism, and like I’ve said before, I’m fine with that and see a brighter future as we redistribute the wealth. It would just be better that we do it after I retire so I can join you and get that wealth redistributed to us!

        3. Sam,
          1.) you asked where the figure 2.5% came from. I was just explaining that.
          2.) The top marginal tax rate was 70% in 1980. I assume you were alive in 1980. You may not have been working, but many of the rich were working in 1980 and know what it was like paying that level.
          3.) History is irrelevant??? Certainly not for your fellow tea partiers who love to talk about the Founding Fathers.
          3.) How are you “joining” me??? What wealth is being redistributed to me???

  371. Jack Bennett

    Statistics can be very deceiving. I think your point about the lower 50% paying $43 per month misses the mark by a mile. Those wage earners are earning an average of $15,355. It’s impossible to exist on that income when you factor in health insurance, food, rent or mortgage payments and all other costs.
    Lets take a look at the average income by group:

    1% $12.07 Million
    5% $418,218
    10% $275,540
    25% $162,280
    50% $105,060

    If the top 1% paid an additional $30,000 per year, that would hardly dent their budget, relatively speaking. That would shave off $50 Billion of the deficit. The $43 per month off the lowest rung of the income ladder would truly represent the difference between driving to work or walking. The point being that statistics can be presented in any manner to support a myriad of points. When you start dissecting the data in an meaningful way
    you can clearly start to understand the relative burden imposed on each income group.

    1. Where do you get the averages? I find it hard to believe that the average <50% income is only $15,000/year bc that is minimum wage. You saying half the US population only makes what they can at McDonald's? I have my doubts.

      1. Sam, I’m with you on most things, but, yes, according to figures at irs.gov, the average AGI for those in the bottom 50% was $15,287 in 2007, $15,355 in 2008 and $15,295 in 2009. Essentially flat. After all, as you correctly indicated, it only takes about $33k to enter the top 50%. However, everybody should remember that all this is calculated based on the returns which include single, married filing jointly, etc. Therefore, (here’s the biggie) it includes part-time workers, retirees, college and high-school kids who make a little money, etc. It’s anyone who is required to file, and, no doubt, the bottom 50% has the highest % of people who were not fully employed.

        Finally as I pointed out elsewhere, the top 1% saw their average AGI fall by 32.5% from 2007 to 2009. Incomes, especially those in the upper range, fluctuate with the economy.

    2. Why should they have to pay more? Because they have the ability? I don’t understand this reasoning. Listen to Sam. Nothing is stopping you from making more money. Trust me. When you have to write a check to the IRS for $70k after you’ve already paid $40k, you’d be a little pissed too. And it doesn’t take a million dollars to get a tax bill that big.

  372. “which once again shows that 40-45% of American income earners pay zero taxes.”

    Zero INCOME taxes. There is still sales tax (highly regressive, since rich people save more money or reinvest) and property tax (which you pay via rent if you have a landlord). If you are living paycheck to paycheck on 22,000/year, you could still be paying (in WA, with no income tax but quite a sales tax) 9% of your income on taxes.

    “It’s ironic that those who pay the least receive the most benefit…”
    Additionally, as a high earner, I benefit more from police protection of my property than a low earner does – mostly because I have more property.
    Additionally, I see a huge unmeasurable benefit from giving the low earners a tax break, which makes them less likely to turn to illegal activities that could make my life less safe.
    There’s a BIG difference between “fair” and “wise”. Taxing the rich a bit more to avoid the poor turning towards more crime or starting a revolution is wise. Food stamps are wise (they stimulate the economy much more than they cost). Free education is wise. We live in a country with an ok but not great balance of fair and wise.

    Lastly, it is much much easier to build wealth when one earns more – you don’t have to live paychcek to paycheck and it’s easier to get savings.

    -top 5%

    1. Also another thing they conveniently forget to mention is that taxes should be based more on ability to pay (wealth) than just on income. And the top 20% control 93% of the wealth. The bottom 80% control only 7% of the wealth. As of 1998. It’s probably even more imbalanced now after Dumbya.

      1. True – here’s a kind of up to date set of infographics.

        It is much easier to save on 500k/year than 50k/year. So every year instead of saving (say) 10k, you save 200k. Even though you earn ‘only’ 10 times as much, you’re able to easily save 20 times as much.

        1. Your after tax income on 500k is about 330k if you are a normal W2 tax payer. You’re probably living in an expensive area to earn that type of income. Saving 200k is doable, but it is certainly not easy if you have any dependents.

          Should t we encourage the person making 50k to develop skills and try and earn more in America? One can start a blog and work 30 hrs a week on it for two years and make 50k for example!

        2. You have stated that people in the bottom 50% (making less than 33K) are not paying their fair share in paying only 2.7% of our total tax revenue). Now you state that it would not be easy for someone making 500K to save 200K per year. According to my calculations, their after-federal tax would be more like 380K (based on your figures, 23+% average effective tax rate). 380K – 200K still leaves you 180K for the rest of your expenses. I agree you couldn’t buy everything you wanted, but it is very doable, and much easier than someone making < 33K to pay an extra $43/month in federal taxes.

          1. So you’re asking people who make 500k to also save 55% of their after tax income? The average US savings rate I’d around 0-5%. You need to put things in perspective.

        3. Unfortunately the charts I linked to aren’t apples to apples as far as the top 1% – but the top 20% of earners (top quintile) earn 55% of the income.

          They have ~93% of the wealth.

          Someone’s saving some money here. The putting into perspective is done.

          It is easier to accumulate wealth with higher earnings, because the minimal cost of living does not change. Perhaps some people without good financial decision-making skills manage to not accumulate wealth and spend all of their money.

          I am not against everyone paying their dollar to the government, but I am also not against higher taxes for high earners.

          1. Why don’t people just make more money? In America, nothing is stopping them from increasing their income. They can start a blog and several years later make 50k no problem.

      2. Sam – I am not ASKING you to save 55% of your after-tax income. I’m just saying if you have 380K in after-tax income, it should be pretty darn easy to save 200K. If not, how would you expect the average person to save anything at all? With your 180K of after-tax income you are STILL in the top 5% of earners BEFORE taxes! The average person only earns about 33K (according to your chart). All I’m saying is you could easily save 200K if you just tried a little harder.

        1. Jenna, unless you make 500k, you had no idea whether it is easy, or how you will feel regarding the progressive tax structure we have.

          You should just be happy and offer to pay more taxes to help out by sending more in to the IRS. We can’t have a proper debate because you’re not there. Sorry, but it’s just the truth and I know you realize it. But, I really do enjoy debating with people who have just speculate and have no idea :)

        2. You’re right. I don’t make 500K, so I don’t understand how hard it is for those who do to save money. But I know YOU realize that YOU don’t make 33K (nor do I), so we don’t really know how hard it is for them to just pay the necessities. However, I, being closer to that than you are, can understand it better than you. So, I guess no one can have a proper debate because everyone comes from a different place.

          BTW….. i just found out there are apparently people in ALL income levels, including the top .1% (yes, I meant that – .1%) that pay no taxes!!! They call them HINTs (High Income No Taxes).

          1. Jenna, that’s where you are wrong again. Nobody just wakes up one day and makes 500K. They work towards that figure over their careers. I know what it’s like making 16K/year, 30k/year, 75k/year etc because that’s how I started.

            Every 50 year old was 21 years old once. It might be best if you debate someone who also is just speculating.

        3. I follow you Janna. If the bottom 50% of earners are expected to live off less than $33,000 a year then the top 1% should have absolutely no problem saving money. There are a certain number of fixed costs needed in life. A person who earns $500,000 a year I would expect to have good money management and at least a financial planner. The person who earns $500,000 a year can save so much more money than the person earning $33,000 a year. They may have higher fixed costs but that is only through want, not need. If they are unable to save then they are living a lavish lifestyle that will one day become unsustainable.

  373. Money Reasons

    It’s ironic that those who pay the least receive the most benefit from those taxes that were collected (including me)…

    I’m not rich, but I don’t think it’s fair to have a progressive tax system. The only difference between this for of discrimination and others forms is that there is no perceived victim by lower wage earners because those that are rich are rich… IMHO, by fairness and logic, it’s still wrong.

    1. Income shouldn’t be the only determining factor of how much we pay in taxes. It should also be determined by a persons ability to pay or wealth . Two people can have the same income but if one has no other assets like stocks, bonds, trusts, insurance policies, owned real estate etc. He can not pay his taxes if he gets a costly illness or interruption of income, as easily as the person who does have these other assets, as a safety net. So their should also be a small wealth tax added for the rich. (people making above 250,000). Based on how much more than 250k they make. This would also help alleviate the extreme inequality in wealth in this country which is worse than all of the western European countries. Inequality hurts economies because huge numbers of people can not acquire a decent education and good paying jobs. It’s is a huge loss of human capital, the most important capital of any economy. Lets not make more welfare states like Mississippi, Alabama, and so many other Republican states down south with their low taxes and lousy wages. And lousy education and healthcare. Cut waste by all means but don’t cut investment in our future growth and prosperity.
      Finally, it is fair for the wealthy to pay more not only because of their greater ability to pay, but because they benefit much more from all this country has to offer . The business man benefits much more from economic infrastructure such as highways, railways, airports, air traffic control and navigation satellites, Harbors, shipping lanes and navigable waterways, locks and dams, power grids, public education, and protection of his great wealth through police and fire protection, than the private citizen does. Just to name a few. This country once had much higher taxes especially the wealthy, than it does today. And it grew much faster with less inequality than it has in the last 20 years. In fact it grew faster then and the middle class was much larger and prosperous then than any time in U.S. history. We’ve been going backwards as we all know and it isn’t because the rich haven’t been making any profits. We’re now in the second guilded age of inequality. Which ended with the great depression.

      1. I agree income shouldn’t be the only factor. However, I do believe everybody who makes an income should pay some federal income taxes so we all are contributing in this way. It can be only $500 a YEAR in taxes, 50 million non payers who do that would raise $25 billion for the US. Not massive, but that goes a long way to fund various educational endeavors.

        1. Money Reasons

          I think that everybody should pay something in taxes too. If not, then we live in a welfare state and we all know that such a system eventually fails, especially for the next generation. And for such a system to work it need to be fair. Why should I but my butt only to have it distributed by a tax system that’s unfair when I’m in retirement. What incentive do I have to bust my butt if all my income accumulated and saved goes to some grasshoper (from the grasshoper and the ants story) that just partied?

  374. I was struck by what was not said. Based on the AGI column it looks like the top 1% makes about 20% of income and pays about 38% in income taxes. So they pay about twice what they would in a non-progressive income tax.

    While the bottom 50% make about 12% of income and pay under 3% of income tax. While the payroll taxes are essentially regressive, ending at about 106,000, meaning the lower income, the ones you refer to as paying no taxes, shoulder a larger proportion of that tax. This group, 50x the size of the 1% group, is especially vulnerable to economic hiccups and lack any sort of nest egg to protect against unemployment or medical bills.

    The question is if you increase their taxes would you recoup the cost in the increase in social programs, when more of them become homeless or need to turn to government funded emergency rooms for medical care? That $500 dollars a year is significant to many people in this category.

    The wealthier on the on the hand whether we mean the ultra wealthy or even people like me (flirting with the top 10% in moderate city, Washington DC) have the resources to absorb increased taxes much more easily.

    To be clear, given the deficit and the two wars we haven’t paid for, I think people in my situation should pay more, so I’m not just advocating taxing other people. I’m prepared to do my part and accept that pain. Engaging in two wars without increasing government income in ludicrous.

  375. This is such a brilliant comment! Love this “Raising taxes on the wealthy ultimately does very little. Raise their taxes, and they will raise your rent. Raise their taxes, and your Big Mac will cost more. The costs will always shift from those that have and produce to those that need and spend.”

    You try and screw “the rich”, they will end up screwing all of you by passing all the costs down.

    1. Does that mean that no matter how high they raise their prices (tax increase or not) that
      we have to buy it? Or will we be able to buy it with our stagnant real wages the last
      20 yrs.? No. I don’t think so. They already know how much they can hike prices before
      they start losing customers. And that’s what they fix their prices at. Tax or no Tax. In
      fact they’re always trying to lower prices to compete for market share. So raising prices
      is the last thing they will do. They will more likely try to cut costs if they can, or accept
      the lower markup, lest they lose any more money (customers) by hiking prices. You
      morons think the middle class survive via the rich. But the opposite is true. They need
      us more than we need them. Wake up! When this country was born the people were
      mostly self sufficient. There were no rich people or big corporations. People grew
      their own food, and raised livestock, wove their own fabric, made their own clothes,
      built their own cabins from the trees that were on the land they staked their claim to
      and traded their products if they needed something they couldn’t produce themselves.
      with someone who did produce them. (blacksmith, cattle rancher, horse rancher etc.)
      Let them raise their prices. We will then hold out for more pay or not make their
      products for them or run their businesses for them. Oh yeah that’s right you pubes
      don’t believe in unions. Just servitude. You are too spineless to stand up to crooks for
      yourselves or your wives and kids. Get off your knees and stand up for solidarity like
      the greatest generation before us did and fought for the middle class. Which built this
      economy not the swindlers and crooked business owners. Divided we fall and that’s
      just what the crooks and swindlers in business have gotten fools like you to do. And
      that’s the way it’s been going since Ray Gun and other pubes got in and started busting union wages and convincing the middle class morons that if we didn’t let them, they would
      fire us all and hire other morons who would work for less than us. Which they did ,
      because their is always a clueless moron who can’t figure out that by just worrying
      about his own worthless hide he actually hurts his future wealth and that of the
      middle class and the growth of our economy. The race to the bottom continues.

  376. I definitely feel lucky to be living in America. I was surprised the Singapore was ranked in the top ten. I didn’t know they were that wealthy.

    1. Maximum tax rate in Singapore is like 22%, no property taxes as well. Consequently, housing prices are just insane. A small detached house is $5 million SGD or $3.75M USD… makes California housing look cheap by comparison.

  377. Pete | Credit Release

    I kinda like the idea of the top 1% paying more these days. With the recession and the media doing the rounds about “wealth” I think some of these higher earners can afford to pump back a bit more of their wealth into the nation’s economy.

  378. I think your blog gets several thousand hits Sam, so you must have at least a dozen readers / commenters in the top 1%. Can you post the stats for the top 0.5%, 0.1%, 0.01% to give us yet another target to shoot for?

    -Mike

  379. Wow, had no idea Qatar and Luxembourg were that high. It’s fascinating to see how we compare to the other 9 countries, and also how the top 1% of taxpayers in the US pay 38% of the total.

  380. I’m mindnful of not complaining or taking my wonderful life for granted. Now I feel even better looking at those stats! Jean Chatzky mentioned in a recent book not to compare ourselves with those doing better than us, but with those worse off. You’ll feel much better. Education is a key driver of higher income.

    1. Good point. When people think ultra-rich, they are thinking the top 0.1% not top 1%!

      The top 1% are everywhere, which is interesting… since there’s only 1% of them. Hmmmmm.

  381. Continuation of my reply:
    Since I am in the upper 50%, I expect my taxes to increase. No problem, I am astute enough (tax savvy) to keep my effective tax rate reasonable! I think other people in the upper 50% have access to the same experts as the effective tax rate would indicate. The $33,048 earner is struggling to survive! Whether this is for one person or a family of four, they are ultra sensitive to price changes/increases and the normal difficulties of life. The addition of $43 per month or $516 per year could be devastating. We want them to save, stay out of debt and flourish, just like everyone. I believe the poverty level is around $22,500 for a family four. Additional taxes will drive more people into poverty which means more government programs. There no easy answer to this.

      1. Kids are INCREDIBLY expensive! Which is why birth control and condoms should be free at any public clinic, no matter your age or income and whithout requiring parental consent – as they are in the UK, Europe, and the rest of the civilized world! If you can’t afford the pill, you certainly can’t afford a child!
        And that way, we won’t have to keep paying for certain welfare recepients to purposefully keep having children for an additional check every month. Make the birth control and condoms free, stop paying them more per child, and require them to be either working or in college/trade school/job training to be on welfare. Having a program to help people through a slump is good; having people stay on welfare for GENERATIONS, and not even TRY to get off of it…well, that’s what we have.
        We must be willing, as a nation, to provide birth control and higher education at low costs, to young people especially, so that they may better themselves and become productive (and tax-paying) members of society.

        1. By the way, as you pointed out, the top 1 percent has become too inclusive a bracket. Why is a Radiologist in the same tax bracket as Mel Gibson and Donald Trump? Especially since the latter two end up not paying anything; Warren Buffet said himself that due to loop holes, his secretary pays more taxes than he does!

          1. Mark Zuckerberg Sux

            I hope you know he was being disingenuous and acting as a political hack. Someone’s response was maybe the cheapskate should pay her more! The trick is he makes hundreds of million dollars but pays himself a paltry income of like 50 to 70k. So his taxes are at those rates. The real income is from dividends of the interest and earnings of his portfolio. That is capital gains only taxed at 20% If we could borrow a billion dollars and live off the interest of a conservative investment, we could earn a million dollars per year in capital gains and only pay 20% taxes of $200,000. Not $390,000 required of someone earning that as income.
            He is a liar.

            1. He wasnt being a liar.

              He was pointing out how people that make money from capital gains and work the same hours can pay less than someone making labor wages working the same 40 hour week and making a 100th of what the other guy makes.
              Capital gains taxes should be higher for people that are millionaires.

      2. I say the USA is the land of opportunity which gives you the chance to move up the money ladder. As a laborer who is in the top 50% I have worked with people who do not have the abbility to move up the ladder. I feel as an American if you do make it to the higher percentages you should pay a higher % and support the system that gives you that opportunity, and be a true american!

  382. The ironic thing for me is I only got to be in the upper percentages after moving out of the USA 5 years ago- that is just twisted! I guess to add to your post I’d say it would be good to be born in one of the top 10 countries, get educated and established then move to a lower cost of living area while finding something that pays well and is rewarding.

    By the way, the effective tax rate applies to Federal taxes only, still have state, FICA and local taxes to deal with! Most other countries have a single income tax rate but the USA is the home of nickel & dime tactics so you have to add all these incremental income taxes together.

    -Mike

    1. That is ironic! Yep, these tax rates are only Federal Tax rates unfortunately. Everyone should tack on another 10% to figure out their total effective tax rate! WHOO HOO! Tax us baby to death!

      1. Tax rates in the US are small compared to most of the first world but it seems that more people complain there than anywhere else. My country has a 45% upper tax bracket (over 200,000).

  383. I don’t feel wealthy, but it’s all relative. Sometimes what we perceive isn’t reality, compared to others.

    Personally, I’m glad to be an American and have the overall opportunities that I have in my life.

    1. I’m surprised you don’t feel wealthy. I recommend for your next holiday to travel to India, Vietnam, Cambodia, Nepal, or even Many countries in South America. You will feel so wealthy afterwards!

      1. Or you could just go to Detroit…just think of all the money you could save. You could probably even try to wring that $43 dollars out of a lot of people. Seriously I think it is a little silly to complain about paying 97% of the taxes when we are making 87% of the money. The argument IMHO breaks down even more when people making 20% of all the money are paying 38% of all the income tax. Sorry you can afford it. How much money do you really need? Lets just say you only make $410,000 and you pay the average tax for the top 1%. What about 23%? $315k give or take is what is left. Now let’s take the person making $33k after their 2.5% they have $32,175. Is gas, electricity, food and other things 10x cheaper for this person? The actual numbers are much different because someone earning exactly $410,000 is going to pay less of an actual tax, and someone earning $33k is going to pay more of an actual tax, but I think you get my point.

        1. It’s not 23%. You pay a 35% Federal tax rate at $410,000.

          If you make over $400,000, then your perspective is valid. But, if you are just pontificating, then, you don’t truly understand the other side of the story.

  384. It’s funny how the same data can be spun either way. If you read HuffPo (who, ironically, are being sued for using their writers for free – and saw AOL enact a bunch of layoffs as a result of their deal), all they spew is how the top 1% owns all this wealth, how they should pay more taxes, etc. No mention of the 47% that don’t pay a dime in federal taxes each year.

    At the end of the day, our tax policy is set not by sound financial principals or fairness, but by politics. When you have half the country not paying any taxes, it’s kinda tough to enact any change that would force them to do so. It just wouldn’t win you an election (job 1 for politician) or re-election (job 1.5).

    1. Did someone out a gun to these writers heads and force them to writefor free? Or, were they expected to be compensated and didn’t?

      I’d write for Huff. Good publicity!

  385. Interesting to hear some of you talk about how living in more rural parts of the country saves you quite a lot of money. I did a post on this two days ago. I figure that by the time interest is calculated over the lifetime of the mortgage I saved about half a million dollars on my house by choosing not to live in a big city. This doesn’t mention all of the other ways it saves me money.

    I was actually surprised that the USA wasn’t by far #1 in the rankings (and I’m a Canadian). Qatar I can understand due to the low population and surge of oil money, but the rest really surprise me. I would have never thought Norway would be ahead, even with their recent oil findings. It’s no wonder they are coming up as a great place to live in all the surveys. Their tax rates are ridiculously high, and if that is the average income, imagine all that money the government has to play with (re: spend frivolously).

    1. Norway spreads it wealth to its people. Great health care, education and BENEFITS. One year off for both parents after a birth. Five weeks vacation. It was just listed as the happiest country in the world. They use there taxes wisely.

  386. I’d have to agree with Kris – I often feel lucky being born here. There’s basically nothing that you can’t do, and success is there if you’re willing to work for it – no matter how you define success. That’s quite a bit of money that a lot of people live on (to me, where homes are 100k in my area), so making the country average Ive got it better than most in my state.

    1. There’s nothing we really cant do indeed. That is the American spirit we must all embrace!

      Traveling the world changes you, which is why I recommend everybody do so.

      1. Robert miller

        Big money should be paying their share. So called non-profits like Hospitals who are tax exempt, enjoying billions in revenue, providing less than 5% in community support, which is largely the gap between what Medicare pays, and what they claim services are valued at. That isn’t providing for anyone who can’t pay. Driving on an interstate does cost any income tax payer because that money is paid at the pump. GAS TAX.

  387. This was an excellent article. You are right, it isn’t too hard to fall in the top 50% if you try. That said, $33K is not a lot to live on and that means that a lot of people in our country are living on far less than I would be comfortable with. That is sort of sobering.

  388. I feel great to be an American. I wasn’t born here and many of my relatives are oversea making a pittance. Any of them would be thankful to make $20,000 a year! I would love to be in the top 1%, I’ll have to start my own business though.

  389. What I notice is the effective tax rate is far below the 35% that created so much controversy in Washington, DC. I notice that the effective tax rate is similar to mine and I am not in the Top 1%. It must be good to be King! I realize as income increases that I have more choices to reduce my AGI! This shows if the top tax rate were 39%, the rich would be paying a much lower effective tax rate. Instead of the bottom 50% paying $43 per month additional tax per year, have the top 50% pay it and more. The effective tax rates are fairly low comparatively relative to the earnings. $33K for a family of 4 does not go to far!
    These statistics motivate me to earn more because it makes me realize I will keep more of my earnings!

    1. Sorry, pls elaborate. You want the top percentile to pay even more in taxes even though the top 50% pay for already 97% of all taxes? Wouldn’t it be easier to spread the burden around instead? Even just a little bit?

      1. You will notice the effective tax rate of the high income earners is considerably below the maximum tax rate. There are 2 reasons for that, high itemized deductions and/or the progressive tax brackets. They are paying on a net effective rate lower taxes than people who earn considerably less. If you just increased the top 50% earners one percent, never mind increasing the top bracket to 39%, it would yield more than enough taxes. The basis for the progressive tax system is to give a break to lower income earners. Too often, Congress looks for an easy answer versus really solving the problem. For the record, I think it will take a combination of cutting spending and raising taxes, but I have little confidence that it will be fair!

        1. Ok, so even though the highest income earners pay a higher effective tax rate and a mug large absolute tax amount, you still want to tax them more even though half the working American population pays nothing? Please address your thoughts on the bottom half.

          If you are for raising taxes, are you also for raising your own taxes? What about equality?

          1. have you forgotten about payroll taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, sales tax. Why don’t you add all that in on the low income earners and see how much they pay a year.

            1. Mark Zuckerberg Sux

              Those are regional taxes that vary with benefits from area to area. Georgia residents don’t pay or benefit from Tennessee taxes etc. FICA payroll taxes are not considered a tax since you will supposedly get some of that money back as social security.
              I am perplexed why so many on this thread think it’s okay to get a free ride and then decide/ vote for a nicer ride! Excuse me, I’m tired of riding in your drab Prius, I demand toy buy a Mercedes.
              Sure, but you have to contribute something to the payment, not just gas.

        2. If I had to vote on who should pay an extra $43 per month, the top 50% or the bottom 50%, that would be a no-brainer… the top 50% of course, and that would include myself. For the top 1% (whom so many people seem so worried about), $43 a month would mean absolutely nothing! For the bottom 50%, who at under $2800/month gross, probably have little to no disposable income, it would mean a great deal! At a time when so many Americans are unemployed or underemployed, I find it amazing how some pundits whine about millionaires having to pay anymore! I’m sure most of those in the bottom 50% would love to be in the position to make enough money to have to pay more taxes! Sure, the highest income earners pay a larege absolute tax amount, but they also keep a large absolute amount! How much of my tax money went to bail out the banks, and yet those CEO’s continued to receive multi-million dollar bonuses!

        3. Exactly Janna… no one wants to take money away from the wealthy…but all things being equal, their disposable income is much greater than the lower 50%.

        4. Mark Zuckerberg Sux

          Everyone in America should contribute something! You never appreciate a free lunch as much as the one you paid for. The free lunches thinks what else is included with this meal.

  390. Are those income percentages (top 1 percent, 5 percent, etc) for sole income wage earners, or what married couples submit to the IRS?

    I have always felt incredibly lucky to have been born in the US. I know a ton of people that emigrated to the US, and are incredibly successful. Then I get frustrated with those who were born here and have chosen not to take advantage of all the opportunities we have to offer in America.

    That is a huge difference between the top one and five percent!

    1. The figures are based on individual income tax returns according to taxfoundation.org. It would make sense bc a couple making $67k/yr being considered as a top 25% income earner doesn’t make as much sense as an individual making 67k IMO.

    1. I do that for about 6 weeks every year – it is great! My wife and I go to either South East Asia (Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia) or India. Its nice to make US wages but get things MUCH cheaper!

  391. Sunil from The Extra Money Blog

    i consider myself blessed for what i have at this point in my life. as it pertains to the article however, having seen and experienced enough of this world, what jumps out at me that although good to know, these numbers do not mean much when the other side of the equation (cost of living) is not brought into the picture.

    i am happy to be an American for many reasons, but not because of the numbers presented. i do agree that anyone can move into whatever income bracket they’d like. the world is out there up for grabs for anyone willing to get out of their comfort zone.

      1. Less government

        I agree that we should not punish anyone who works hard to make it up the income ladder. After being in the top 50% for many years I worked by butt off and made it to the top 25% this year. But in the process for all my work and effort I pay $18,000 more in taxes. But then again we are becoming a welfare state where more and more people less then half my age are on welfare, food stamps, medicade, and have HUD paying for their housing. I guess I am getting tried of working hard all these years for those who dont.

    1. Respectfully disagree sunil… Health, family care responsibility (including parents) and opportunity are all factors which can rob that person from achieving their full potential.

      I came from welfare and thanks to education and an ambitious spouse, we are living beyond what I ever thought possible. But I just can’t accept that everyone has the “same” opportunity, because it’s much more complex than that.

      Grateful I am, but judgmental, I am not.

  392. hi!
    um, I feel lucky every day. Just had this convo with my dad the other day…..what country you’re born in and what opportunities you’re given as a child are just pure luck. Then, for the lucky ones, it’s up to them/us to be aware that we’re lucking and be thankful every day. Sometimes I forget, but today I remember, especially after reading this.

  393. Whenever I think I’m going to make millions of dollars I just remember, “In America, the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” Not to sound like a debbie downer, but sometimes making the top 1% is more than hard work – it’s luck as well.

    That being said, wish me luck!

  394. I feel excited looking at these stats. I really believe if we continue working harder we’ll keep moving up. I’m grateful that my family has taught us to make opportunities.

    1. I feel excited too. I’d like the IRS to keep going higher, like the top 0.5%, and then the top 0.1% because even in the top 1%, there is A LOT of room to grow!

      Best, Sam

  395. I continually feel very blessed to be living in the U.S. and to have the opportunities that I have available to me. My household is in the top 10%, but we live in a low cost of living area (central U.S.). Having this type of income in this location is the best of both worlds. At ages 26 and 25, me and my wife are living the life of our dreams. We have a great house that we love, we give a good amount of money away, we invest in more real estate, we save a huge chunk every month for retirement, and we also spend a good deal of money each month doing the things we love (golfing!).

    We consider ourselves extremely blessed, to say the least. To be born at this point in time, in this location of the world is a bit like winning the lottery (with even bigger odds). We recognize the responsibility that goes along with this.

    1. Curious, what life were you born into? Were your parents middle class, upper, lower? How’d you pay for college? To be so young and so well off, chances are you were either extremely lucky or you had a head start.

      1. It’s best to always attribute success and fortune to luck instead of hard work and ingenuity when people ask. Never let others know how much you’ve done to get to where you are.

        How about you? What’s your story?

        1. Sorry, obviously up to mba degree 100% paid for via endowment. Finance career handed with a silver platters. Why not brag and make money while at it. Congrats!

    2. Jeff Butcher

      This was 7 years ago and hopefully your out of bankruptcy court by now. Why do mostly Americans say the dumbest things like say they are blessed to live in the US where you can achieve your goals or whatever. What countries are you comparing ‘Merica to. Syria? NK? Are people in Germany held back by the government so they can’t achieve goals. Or you can live in Red China who are so rich they loan us Billions every year, have bought up most of America. And in a couple years they will be the biggest super power in the world. Maybe then goals will be unobtainable do to our weak standing in the world and the rise of China who have already taken over the world as leaders and our silly anti science mentality and 2000 year old archaic beliefs in some Mumbo Jumbo crazy beliefs will be the death of this nation. Look at the biggest god living countries. Syria. US Iran Iraq. Most of those places are uninhabitable. Look at the Bible Belt where most people have just given up on education and the English language. It’s not a stretch to think about after trying to communicate with a person from Mississippi that we Have a load of problems. The natives there think science is the devil and so are Liberals as they drive around in their science cars talk on their cells and collect welfare checks. Not an intelligent race. That’s why where you live and they do it is cheap to live. With little money put into schools or something to do the tribes are not educated and drag this country down. Need I mention who the yokels voted for and they still if you could understand their language would stil say he’s a great president and Lock her Up. Who needs a judicial process let’s go crazy and go back 200 years where men weren’t men unless they beat their wives while always carrying their guns on them. Back before science when doctors operated on people while they were awake until they almost always died. God will protect them. Well he was AWOL again until science came to the rescue. Wow I got really sidetracked. This wasn’t my intention sorry to all my fans. I wanted to talk about when somebody interviews somebody from say Georgia says. Yea we got a few problems here in the country but it’s still the best country in the world. Most of these people have never left their state or own a horseless carriage. How do they know. I can think of many better countries. Not to get into it but they are all atheist majority countries. Instead of 30000 people being killed by a gun annually their are 2 or 3. Where the prisons aren’t babysitting millions of criminals and pot smokers. Gov is not corrupt schooling including university is free as well as healthcare. Yes taxes are a lot more but you get something in return. If you have a heart attack you don’t need to sell the house to pay for it. It’s amazing what good you can do if you don’t spend 800+ Billion dollars a year to build more bombs. Funny how Trump says our military is in disrepair. The equipment is old and unusable. Worst the military has ever been. Yet we spend more money than Russia China North Korea Iraq and two more do combined. The next country I think is China which less than half that we do. Over 800B every year and all because we go around and kill people which pisses them off and they hate us so they retaliate. If you were a child and saw your parents killed by a US weapon I’d assume you’d be pissed too. Ok I’m off the tracks now. Thankfully no one will read this and I got my venting out for the week. Freedom. Yeah that’s not a US only thing. Most countries have it and a lot have more freedom than we do. And to the jesustards down southb. Take care y’all

      1. Apart from most of your commentary being inaccurate and clearly without supported facts, I’m only going respond to your remarks that directly disparage me and the rest of my large extended Asian family. In your diatribe above , you have incorrectly stereotyped a Christian as someone who is an uneducated ignorant gun wielding Caucasian wife beater from the south. I am NONE of those things! My parents are from “Red China.” They immigrated to the Silicon Valley in the late 60s after fleeing from China to Taiwan. Our family is well educated and we worked long hard hours for our freedom and relative affluence. In addition, we know a thing or two about freedom and the loss of it as my maternal grandfather was TORTURED by the Japanese when they invaded China in WWII and my paternal grandfather had his entire transportation business and all his wealth stripped from him as the communists took over China. If you are implying that China is awesome because they own America, you are wrong there too. China is quietly allowing Christianity to proliferate in hopes that some of the most egregious ethical violations of humanity will subside. China is not an ideal place to live. Most of the middle class in China are doing everything they can to leave the country. I’ve travelled to every continent in the world and have visited more than 50 countries (including all of the countries you’ve mentioned). America is not perfect, but for its size and diversity, it is still the most amazingly free and affluent country in the world. How can you compare a small one race country with the United States? It’s like comparing apples to ….hippos. Your little rant was offensive and reveals your ignorance and hypocrisy. Thank you for that nugget… I pray that your HATRED towards Christians is replaced with something much more fulfilling (like Love).

      2. Your pontificating and bitter mindset sound similar to the stereotypes you disparage.

        Furthermore, name calling is a sign of ignorance.

        1. Mark Zuckerberg Sux

          Really Jeff? You name call and sound like a complete retard in your tactless factless rage rant. When you get called on it, might I say got your ass handed, you reply with the usual libtard reply of racism,sexism, or any stupid isms you can grasp at.
          Unlike Avon, I don’t give a shit about you and hope you rot as one of those in the lower 99th percentile getting all the Obama CHRISTmas gifts revoked by Trump.

          Where are you from? I’m guessing you have never been to Georgia while you blast those who have not traveled. Maybe you have visited Ga because you had to leave the North or West because the jobs disappeared and cost of living is thru the ceiling. A lot of Yankees are coming to Ga and trying to change it to a blue state while not realizing why they left their shit hole ran into the ground with their liberal regulations! Please stay put. We don’t want you in Texas, Georgia, and the Southern areas.
          As for Trump, he is kicking ass and will be hailed as the most successful president in the last 100 years. I could go into the facts but I think you will have a liberal meltdown.

          1. I voted for Trump

            You can’t go into the facts because there are none that show anything close to why Trump would be hailed as the best president in last 100 years. I voted for him and have realized most of what he says and does is simply not true. You have been drinking the right wing kool aid my friend. Stop watching Fox and friends, its not factual…do some research please.

            1. Pedro Garagorry

              What facts? CNN’S… oh wait.. its The View right?, or MSNBC’s Chris Matthews…oh please …

            2. Mark Fuckerburg Zucks

              I forgot to mention he’ll also be the best president for the next 100 years too.
              He has done more work in 2 years than most presidents in 4 years. All this while fighting against liberals working full time against him with the 94% negative press coverage and jealous grandstanding Republicans life time politicians.
              Let’s cover a few you wouldn’t know from watching your favorite shows like those nasty women on the View or Al dumb dumb Sharpton.
              1. Economy! The Dow has hit 28000 points which represents a lot of growth. Money our 401k and 403b are in. Unemployment at record lows 3% territory. Lowest for blacks…ever. Lowest also for Hispanics and women, Asians…ever recorded. Economic growth in the 4% territory in spite of the feds kept jacking up interest rates too quickly
              Welfare reduction by 4 million
              Largest labor participation rate..ever

              2. Regained control of economy. with unprecedented growth via withdrew from Paris Accord and global warning ass fuckery designed to cripple the USA while other polluting powers get passes. Meanwhile, we have has the greatest reduction in Co2 surpassing atk of the European Union combined! That’s thanks to fracking technology. Also left the TPP.

              3. Energy independence!!!! This one is yuuge. This is the first time our country has not relied on other countries for energy. F-U OPEC!! Hell, most Americans either forgot our don’t know about that mafia oil cartel. We actually sell energy. This was done in combinations of deregulation, pipeline allowance, opened exploration.
              Took control of EPA which waa acting as a control arm of Obama’s regime.

              4 Foreign policy: Destruction of that jv team ISIS. He just keeps cutting their heads off while kicking ass and taking names. Oh look, no wars either. I guess its good to have a brash loud mouth in the White House.
              Pulled out of Iran nuclear deal while moving Israel embassy to Jerusalem. That saved a billion dollars and only spent 500k to build on our owned land.
              Backed Ukraine to help themselves against invading Russians.
              Made headway with N. Korea although that’s a developing story with crazy rocket man.They destroyed some testing sites and returned American soldier remains. Freed American hostages there.
              Put China on notice with their intellectual theft of American companies. The trade war will ultimately help us but we have to beck him since they are trying to wait fit the 2020 election.
              Got Mexico to help with tampering the large amounts of illegals coming into America.
              Got rid of the VISA lottery
              Reworked the North America trade agreement.
              Reworked European trade agreements
              Got countries in NATO\ U.N. to pony up more money
              Basically puts America first with no apologies as he says. That is the best! What a contrast from the Obama apology tour.

              5 VA accountability finally. Vets can see private docs.

              6 signed right to try where terminally ill patients can try experimental drugs

              7 tax breaks for 95% of Americans

              8 federal judge appointments of 70 in less than 2 years.
              Supreme Court nominations x2 although I won’t brag about Cavanaugh since he is a guilty Republican stooge down with the liberal causes.

              9 military rebuild and support. Better rules of engagements.

              He literally works for us all day for free. He could have enjoyed a billionaire life easily.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *